diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'publish/references')
| -rw-r--r-- | publish/references/pull-requests.md | 105 |
1 files changed, 105 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/publish/references/pull-requests.md b/publish/references/pull-requests.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..9ac4ded --- /dev/null +++ b/publish/references/pull-requests.md @@ -0,0 +1,105 @@ +# Pull requests and PR review comments + +Loaded from the `publish` skill when the artifact is a PR description or a PR +review comment. A plain commit never needs any of this, which is why it lives +here rather than in SKILL.md. + +Steps 0 and 1 of the publish flow (pre-flight reconcile, local code review) and +the `/voice personal` pass still apply — see SKILL.md. This file carries only +what is specific to PRs. + +**For PR descriptions:** + +1. Write the title as line 1 and the body below it to `/tmp/pr-<slug>.md`. **Title format:** the conventional-commit subject (`refactor: remove dead if-count-is-not-None check in admin`). If the project defines a publishing overlay with a ticket system, follow it for the ticket suffix in the title and the cross-link line in the body (see the overlay). +2. Run `/voice personal` on the file. The PR title stays imperative per Conventional Commits — `/voice personal` rewrites the body, not the title. +3. Print the final draft inline in the terminal. Title on line 1, blank line, then body — exactly as it'll be posted. State that the skill ran. Surface any pattern #39 (public-artifact scope) warnings. +4. Ask: approve, request changes, or open in editor. Wait for an explicit answer. Do not open the file in `emacsclient` (or any editor) by default. + - **Approve** → continue to step 5. + - **Request changes** → make them, re-run `/voice personal`, re-print inline, ask again. + - **Open in editor** → only if the user asks. `emacsclient -n /tmp/pr-<ticket-or-slug>.md`. After the editor closes, re-read the file, re-print inline, ask again. +5. Split the file on the first blank line and pass the title and body to `gh pr create --title "..." --body "$(tail -n +3 <file>)"` (or a heredoc) so formatting is preserved. Add `--reviewer <user[,user...]>` in the same call when you already know who should review. +6. Request reviewers on the new PR if you didn't pass `--reviewer` at create time. Use `gh pr edit <N> --add-reviewer <user>`. If the repo has a `CODEOWNERS` file, GitHub auto-suggests based on touched paths. Still issue the explicit request so the reviewer gets notified. Pick reviewers per the team's convention for the area touched (often documented in the per-repo `CLAUDE.md`). For follow-up PRs, consider tagging the parent PR's author if their context would help. PRs without a human reviewer request stall — "checks passed" is not a substitute for review. +7. **Project publishing overlay (if present).** If the project defines a publishing overlay — a `publishing-<team>.md` rule loaded from its `.claude/rules/` — run its post-create steps now: ticket cross-linking, ticket-state moves, and any other tracker integration it specifies. A project with no overlay skips this; the PR is already open and reviewers are requested, which is the complete universal flow. + +**For PR review comments and replies (review verdicts, threaded discussion, follow-up notes on someone else's PR or your own):** + +Pick the shape first. Most reviews are Shape 1. + +- **Shape 1 — Single review** (verdict + summary body + 0+ inline pins). The default for any post that carries a verdict (`APPROVE`, `REQUEST_CHANGES`, `COMMENT`), even when the verdict has no line-specific findings. One `gh api` call posts the summary, every inline pin, and the verdict together. review notification fires once for `APPROVE` or `REQUEST_CHANGES`. +- **Shape 2 — Issue-thread comment** (no verdict). General PR discussion, not a review. No inline pins. No review notification. +- **Shape 3 — Reply on an existing inline thread**. Responding to a specific prior reviewer comment. Threads under that comment. No review notification. + +**Inline threshold for Shape 1.** Any finding that names a `path:line` belongs as an inline comment pinned to that line. Cross-cutting observations (verdict rationale, "third PR with the same pattern", overall test-coverage gaps that don't pin to one place) stay in the summary body. There's no "fold one inline into the summary" exception — a single line-specific finding still goes inline. + +**Shape 1: Single review (bundled summary + inline)** + +1. Identify findings, split into **inline-eligible** (each names a specific `path:line`) and **summary-only** (cross-cutting). Decide the verdict. + +2. Write one concatenated draft to `/tmp/pr-<N>-review.md` with explicit separators: + + ``` + === SUMMARY === + <verdict summary body> + + === INLINE path=frontend/src/foo.tsx line=440 === + <inline body 1> + + === INLINE path=frontend/src/bar.tsx line=137 === + <inline body 2> + ``` + + The separator format is exactly `=== SUMMARY ===` and `=== INLINE path=<path> line=<n> ===`. The summary block is mandatory even for verdict-only reviews. Inline blocks are zero-or-more. + +3. Run `/voice personal` on the file once. The skill walks its full pattern list across every block at the same time. The separators stay intact because they aren't prose. + +4. Print the final draft inline in the terminal. Every block — the summary body AND the full prose of every inline comment — exactly as it'll be posted, with its separator header. Print the inline in full; never describe it in place of printing it ("I'd pair it with one inline on…"). Craig approves the exact words that post under his name, so the exact words must be on screen. State that the skill ran (e.g. "/voice personal — full pattern walk across summary + 3 inline"). Surface any pattern #39 warnings. + +5. Ask: approve, request changes, or open in editor. Wait for an explicit answer. Do not open the file in `emacsclient` (or any editor) by default. + - **Approve** → continue to step 6. + - **Request changes** → make them, re-run `/voice personal` on the whole file, re-print inline, ask again. + - **Open in editor** → only if the user asks. `emacsclient -n /tmp/pr-<N>-review.md`. After the editor closes, re-read, re-print inline, ask again. + +6. Split the file on the separator lines and post in **a single** `gh api` call: + + ``` + gh api repos/<owner>/<repo>/pulls/<N>/reviews \ + --hostname <ghe-host-or-omit> \ + -F event=REQUEST_CHANGES \ + -F body="<summary block>" \ + -F "comments[][path]=<path1>" \ + -F "comments[][line]=<line1>" \ + -F "comments[][body]=<inline 1>" \ + -F "comments[][path]=<path2>" \ + -F "comments[][line]=<line2>" \ + -F "comments[][body]=<inline 2>" + ``` + + `event` is one of `APPROVE`, `REQUEST_CHANGES`, `COMMENT`. The `comments[]` array can be empty for verdicts with zero line-specific findings — the call still uses the same endpoint. Pass `--hostname` for non-`github.com` hosts (a project's publishing overlay names its host when it's a GitHub Enterprise instance). + +7. Verify the review landed. `gh api repos/<owner>/<repo>/pulls/<N>/reviews --hostname ...` returns the latest review with bundled inlines. Confirm `state` matches the verdict and the inline count matches what was posted. + +8. **Project review-notification overlay (if present).** If the project defines a publishing overlay with a review-notification step (e.g. a Slack ping to the PR author), run it now — but only for `APPROVE` and `REQUEST_CHANGES` verdicts. The overlay owns the channel, the message format, the author-mention lookup, and the threading. A project with no overlay skips notification entirely. `COMMENT` verdicts and Shapes 2-3 below never notify, overlay or not. + +**Shape 2: Issue-thread comment (no verdict)** + +Use when the post is informal discussion that shouldn't appear as a review verdict (e.g. "I'd like to discuss the X approach before you continue"). + +1. Write the proposed comment to `/tmp/pr-<N>-comment.md`. +2. Run `/voice personal`. +3. Print inline, ask approve/changes/edit, gate as in Shape 1 step 5. +4. Post: `gh pr comment <N> --body-file /tmp/pr-<N>-comment.md`. +5. Verify: `gh api repos/<owner>/<repo>/issues/<N>/comments`. +6. No review notification. + +**Shape 3: Reply on an existing inline thread** + +Use when responding to a specific prior reviewer comment. + +1. Find the parent comment ID: `gh api repos/<owner>/<repo>/pulls/<N>/comments`. +2. Write the reply to `/tmp/pr-<N>-reply-<comment-id>.md`. +3. Run `/voice personal`. +4. Print inline, ask approve/changes/edit, gate as in Shape 1 step 5. +5. Post: `gh api repos/<owner>/<repo>/pulls/<N>/comments -F in_reply_to=<comment-id> -F body="$(cat /tmp/pr-<N>-reply-<comment-id>.md)"`. +6. Verify in the same `comments` list. +7. No review notification. + |