Skip to content

Conversation

@claudiacodacy
Copy link
Collaborator

  • adding variables to the log for better degguing

@github-actions github-actions bot added the codacy-review Used to trigger a Codacy AI review on your pull requests label Dec 5, 2025
@codacy-production
Copy link

codacy-production bot commented Dec 5, 2025

Codacy's Analysis Summary

0 new issue (≤ 0 issue)
0 new security issue
-5 complexity
0 duplications

Review Pull Request in Codacy →

AI Reviewer available: add the codacy-review label to get contextual insights without leaving GitHub.

codacy-production[bot]

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link

@codacy-production codacy-production bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull Request Overview

The PR passes all Codacy quality gates, with no new issues and a decrease in complexity. The changes focus on improving log messages for better debugging.

About this PR

  • There's a small typo in the PR description. 'degguing' should be 'debugging'.

💡 Codacy uses AI. Check for mistakes.

if (excludeKeywords.length > 0) {
if (excludeKeywords.some(k => matchesKeyword(title, k))) {
return log("Skipping PR with excluded keywords");
return log("Skipping PR with excluded keywords"+`\ntitle = ${title}`+`\nexcludeKeywords = ${excludeKeywords}`);

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

⚪ LOW RISK

Suggestion: Combining string literals with template literals can be less readable. Consider using a single template literal for the entire log message.

This might be a simple fix:

Suggested change
return log("Skipping PR with excluded keywords"+`\ntitle = ${title}`+`\nexcludeKeywords = ${excludeKeywords}`);
return log(`Skipping PR with excluded keywords\ntitle = ${title}\nexcludeKeywords = ${excludeKeywords}`);

if (requiredKeywords.length > 0) {
if (!requiredKeywords.some(k => matchesKeyword(title, k))) {
return log("Skipping PR without required keywords");
return log("Skipping PR without required keywords"+`\ntitle = ${title}`+`\nrequiredKeywords = ${requiredKeywords}`);

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

⚪ LOW RISK

Suggestion: Combining string literals with template literals can be less readable. Consider using a single template literal for the entire log message.

This might be a simple fix:

Suggested change
return log("Skipping PR without required keywords"+`\ntitle = ${title}`+`\nrequiredKeywords = ${requiredKeywords}`);
return log(`Skipping PR without required keywords\ntitle = ${title}\nrequiredKeywords = ${requiredKeywords}`);

const author = pr.user?.login || "";
const isBot = pr.user?.type === "Bot" || author.endsWith("[bot]");
if (isBot) return log("Skipping bot PR");
if (isBot) return log("Skipping bot PR"+`\nauthor = ${author}`+`\nisBot = ${isBot}`);

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

⚪ LOW RISK

Suggestion: Combining string literals with template literals can be less readable. Consider using a single template literal for the entire log message.

if (!includeDrafts) {
const isDraft = pr.draft === true;
if (isDraft) return log("Skipping draft PR");
if (isDraft) return log("Skipping draft PR"+`\nisDraft = ${isDraft}`);

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

⚪ LOW RISK

Suggestion: Combining string literals with template literals can be less readable. Consider using a single template literal for the entire log message.

@claudiacodacy claudiacodacy merged commit b536d12 into master Dec 5, 2025
2 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

codacy-review Used to trigger a Codacy AI review on your pull requests

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants