Update tld-update.yml to automatically add labels when autopull catches deltas and generates PR

[dnsguru]

This is non-urgent.

When the autopull runs, this auto-adds labels to indicate this is automation and impacts the upper 'ICANN' section

Did not see a way to also automate the project as well in the automation handler, but this will save volunteers steps in labelling when reviewing.

[cpu]

Did not see a way to also automate the project as well in the automation handler, but this will save volunteers steps in labelling when reviewing.

I think you can chain the output of the create pull request task with a separate action for assigning it to a project:
https://github.com/peter-evans/create-pull-request#create-a-project-card

[dnsguru]

name: Create or Update Project Card for new item
        if: ${{ steps.cpr.outputs.pull-request-number }}
        uses: peter-evans/create-or-update-project-card@v2
        with:
          project-number: 2
          column-number: 8657926
          issue-number: ${{ steps.cpr.outputs.pull-request-number }}

does that look right? I confirmed that

• "List Add/Mod/Del" = project-number 2 and
• "To-Do" is column-number 8657926

[dnsguru]

@cpu can you give it a 'sanity peek'?

[weppos]

does that look right? I confirmed that

• "List Add/Mod/Del" = project-number 2 and
• "To-Do" is column-number 8657926

Yes, this sounds correct.

[weppos]

Just as an FYI, in the past I had bad experience with labels with icons. And by "bad" I mean the unicode char did cause random failures in integrations.

I've personally moved away from using any icon/emoji at all in labels.

[cpu]

Should this be a string-typed column-name input instead, with value "To-Do"? I don't see column-number listed in the documented action inputs.

[dnsguru]

You're right.

Should be

column-name: To-Do

[dnsguru]

Updated with

column-name: To-Do

Should be good to go @cpu @weppos

[cpu]

LGTM

[dnsguru]

OK - Gonna merge this, and then @cpu's updated automation that adds the IANA DB link to see if the automation pull behaves as expected

[weppos]

@dnsguru the action failed to run. The reason is because that repo has projects disabled. Even if we turn that on, I'm afraid this won't work (we can still test).

I just noticed now we use an org-level project, and I'm afraid that will require a bit of changes. The token generated by GH during an action run is a transient repo-level token. It doesn't have the permission to touch something outside the repo. If we want to continue with an org-level project we need to generate an individual token and add it to the action secrets.

I turned projects on at the repo level to see if by chance we get lucky and it works. But I don't have too much confidence it will.

[dnsguru]

Yeah, I think we just need to settle for labels.

[dnsguru]

There used to be a lovely konban-esque chart for org level projects that vanished.

[weppos]

There used to be a lovely konban-esque chart for org level projects that vanished.

It's still there, but legacy (called classic) projects are receiving less attention. There's a new type of projects which is the current focus and has different views, including Kanban boards.

[dnsguru]

Is there a way to transfer the past 6 years' legacy project attributes to the new ones?

…

On Wed, Aug 23, 2023, 12:59 AM Simone Carletti ***@***.***> wrote: There used to be a lovely konban-esque chart for org level projects that vanished. It's still there, but legacy (called *classic*) projects are receiving less attention. There's a new type of projects which is the current focus and has different views, including Kanban boards. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#1815 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AACQTJM74XOAYF6P7IMN7BDXWWZ5DANCNFSM6AAAAAA274XWUU> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[weppos]

It seems to be possible, with certain limitations.
https://docs.github.com/en/issues/planning-and-tracking-with-projects/creating-projects/migrating-from-projects-classic

[dnsguru]

Thank you for looking - I'd vote no on that... I am not sure that the "juice/squeeze" ratio of that specific migration technique merits doing it. it looks like it would move the project itself to another project as part of the process... and with my fast-read, it appeared to have a 1200 item limit, which would cause us to lose a lot of institutional data, and I would likely need to recreate labels and other stuff....

…

On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 5:08 AM Simone Carletti ***@***.***> wrote: It seems to be possible, with certain limitations. https://docs.github.com/en/issues/planning-and-tracking-with-projects/creating-projects/migrating-from-projects-classic — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#1815 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AACQTJLIYNUYRHIQ2YLATETXWXXDVANCNFSM6AAAAAA274XWUU> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>