feat: handle gitlab MR draft status #1165

paolomainardi · 2024-08-22T13:44:28Z

User description

As reported in the issue, this MR adds the possibility to skip MR in draft status, default is false when enabled every command is logged and discarded.

PR Type

Enhancement

Description

Added functionality to handle GitLab merge requests (MRs) in draft status
Implemented logic to skip processing of draft MRs:
- For newly opened or reopened MRs
- For comments on existing MRs
Added logging to inform when a draft MR is being skipped
This change allows for more efficient processing by ignoring MRs that are not ready for review

Changes walkthrough 📝

Relevant files

Enhancement

gitlab_webhook.py `Handle GitLab merge request draft status` pr_agent/servers/gitlab_webhook.py Added logic to check if a merge request is in draft status Implemented skipping of draft merge requests for both new MRs and comments on existing MRs Logged information about skipping draft MRs	+11/-0

💡 PR-Agent usage:
Comment /help on the PR to get a list of all available PR-Agent tools and their descriptions

codiumai-pr-agent-pro · 2024-08-22T13:44:56Z

PR-Agent was enabled for this repository. To continue using it, please link your git user with your CodiumAI identity here.

PR Reviewer Guide 🔍

⏱️ Estimated effort to review: 2 🔵🔵⚪⚪⚪
🏅 Score: 95
🧪 No relevant tests
🔒 No security concerns identified
🔀 No multiple PR themes
⚡ Key issues to review Code Duplication There's some duplication in the logic for handling draft MRs in both the 'merge_request' and 'note' event handlers. Consider extracting this logic into a separate function to improve maintainability.

codiumai-pr-agent-pro · 2024-08-22T13:45:24Z

PR-Agent was enabled for this repository. To continue using it, please link your git user with your CodiumAI identity here.

PR Code Suggestions ✨

Category	Suggestion	Score
Enhancement	✅ Extract draft MR skipping logic into a separate function to improve code organization Suggestion Impact: The suggestion was implemented by creating a new function 'should_skip_mr' that encapsulates the logic for checking if a merge request is a draft and should be skipped. code diff: +def should_skip_mr(draft: bool, mr_url: str): + skip_draft_mr = get_settings().get("GITLAB.SKIP_DRAFT_MR", False) + if draft and skip_draft_mr: + get_logger().info(f"Skipping draft MR: {mr_url}") + return True + return False @router.post("/webhook") async def gitlab_webhook(background_tasks: BackgroundTasks, request: Request): @@ -130,8 +136,7 @@ url = data['object_attributes'].get('url') draft = data['object_attributes'].get('draft') - if draft and skip_draft_mr: - get_logger().info(f"Skipping draft MR: {url}") + if should_skip_mr(draft, url): return JSONResponse(status_code=status.HTTP_200_OK, content=jsonable_encoder({"message": "success"})) get_logger().info(f"New merge request: {url}") @@ -143,8 +148,7 @@ draft = mr.get('draft') get_logger().info(f"A comment has been added to a merge request: {url}") - if draft and skip_draft_mr: - get_logger().info(f"Skipping draft MR: {url}") + if should_skip_mr(draft, url): return JSONResponse(status_code=status.HTTP_200_OK, content=jsonable_encoder({"message": "success"})) Consider extracting the logic for checking if a merge request is a draft and should be skipped into a separate function. This will improve code readability and reduce duplication. pr_agent/servers/gitlab_webhook.py [133-135] -if draft and skip_draft_mr: - get_logger().info(f"Skipping draft MR: {url}") - return JSONResponse(status_code=status.HTTP_200_OK, content=jsonable_encoder({"message": "success"})) +if should_skip_draft_mr(draft, skip_draft_mr, url): + return SUCCESS_RESPONSE Apply this suggestion Suggestion importance[1-10]: 8 Why: Extracting the draft MR skipping logic into a separate function would significantly improve code readability and reduce duplication, as this logic is used in multiple places.	8
Enhancement	Simplify the condition for checking bot-like sender names using a list comprehension Consider using f-strings consistently throughout the code. Replace the string concatenation with an f-string for improved readability and consistency. pr_agent/servers/gitlab_webhook.py [122] -if 'codium' in sender_name or 'bot_' in sender_name or 'bot-' in sender_name or '_bot' in sender_name or '-bot' in sender_name: +if any(bot_indicator in sender_name for bot_indicator in ['codium', 'bot_', 'bot-', '_bot', '-bot']): Apply this suggestion Suggestion importance[1-10]: 7 Why: The suggested improvement using a list comprehension would make the code more concise and potentially more efficient. It's a good enhancement but not addressing a critical issue.	7
Maintainability	✅ Use a constant for repeated success responses to improve code maintainability Suggestion Impact: The commit implemented the suggestion by creating a function `create_success_response()` that returns a standardized success response. This function is then used throughout the code to replace repeated JSONResponse calls. code diff: +def create_success_response(): + return JSONResponse(status_code=status.HTTP_200_OK, content=jsonable_encoder({"message": "success"})) Consider using a constant for the 'success' message to avoid repetition and improve maintainability. Define a constant at the module level and use it in all return statements. pr_agent/servers/gitlab_webhook.py [124] -return JSONResponse(status_code=status.HTTP_200_OK, content=jsonable_encoder({"message": "success"})) +return SUCCESS_RESPONSE Apply this suggestion Suggestion importance[1-10]: 7 Why: Using a constant for repeated success responses would improve maintainability and reduce code duplication. However, it's not a critical issue affecting functionality.	7
Best practice	✅ Use a more descriptive variable name to improve code readability Suggestion Impact: The suggestion was implemented, but with a different approach. Instead of renaming the variable, a new function 'should_skip_draft_mr' was created that encapsulates the logic for skipping draft merge requests. code diff: +def should_skip_draft_mr(draft: bool, mr_url: str): + skip_draft_mr = get_settings().get("GITLAB.SKIP_DRAFT_MR", False) + if draft and skip_draft_mr: + get_logger().info(f"Skipping draft MR: {mr_url}") + return True + return False Consider using a more descriptive variable name for `skip_draft_mr`. A name like `should_skip_draft_mrs` would make the boolean's purpose clearer. pr_agent/servers/gitlab_webhook.py [127] -skip_draft_mr = get_settings().get("GITLAB.SKIP_DRAFT_MR", False) +should_skip_draft_mrs = get_settings().get("GITLAB.SKIP_DRAFT_MR", False) Apply this suggestion Suggestion importance[1-10]: 6 Why: Using a more descriptive variable name would improve code readability, but the current name is not severely unclear. It's a good practice but not crucial.	6

paolomainardi · 2024-08-22T14:17:48Z

/review

codiumai-pr-agent-pro · 2024-08-22T14:18:05Z

PR-Agent was enabled for this repository. To continue using it, please link your git user with your CodiumAI identity here.

PR Reviewer Guide 🔍

⏱️ Estimated effort to review: 2 🔵🔵⚪⚪⚪
🏅 Score: 92
🧪 No relevant tests
🔒 No security concerns identified
🔀 Multiple PR themes Sub-PR theme: Implement draft MR handling logic Relevant files: pr_agent/servers/gitlab_webhook.py Sub-PR theme: Add configuration option for skipping draft MRs Relevant files: pr_agent/settings/configuration.toml
⚡ Key issues to review Possible Bug The `skip_draft_mr` variable is defined but not used in the function. It might be better to use the `should_skip_mr` function directly.

paolomainardi · 2024-08-22T14:19:27Z

/improve

paolomainardi · 2024-08-22T14:40:30Z

/improve

codiumai-pr-agent-pro · 2024-08-22T14:40:39Z

PR Code Suggestions ✨

Latest suggestions up to ee15a8a

Category	Suggestion	Score
Maintainability	Extract bot user check into a separate function for better code organization Consider extracting the bot user check into a separate function to improve code readability and maintainability. pr_agent/servers/gitlab_webhook.py [131-134] -sender_name = data.get("user", {}).get("name", "unknown").lower() -if 'codium' in sender_name or 'bot_' in sender_name or 'bot-' in sender_name or '_bot' in sender_name or '-bot' in sender_name: +def is_bot_user(sender_name: str) -> bool: + bot_indicators = ['codium', 'bot_', 'bot-', '_bot', '-bot'] + return any(indicator in sender_name.lower() for indicator in bot_indicators) + +sender_name = data.get("user", {}).get("name", "unknown") +if is_bot_user(sender_name): get_logger().info(f"Skipping bot user: {sender_name}") return create_success_response() Apply this suggestion Suggestion importance[1-10]: 7 Why: This suggestion improves code organization and reusability by extracting a complex condition into a separate function.	7
Enhancement	✅ Simplify the boolean logic in the function to improve readability Suggestion Impact: The suggestion was implemented, but with a different approach. The function was removed entirely and its logic was integrated directly into the main webhook handler. code diff: -def should_skip_draft_mr(draft: bool, mr_url: str): - skip_draft_mr = get_settings().get("GITLAB.SKIP_DRAFT_MR", False) - if draft and skip_draft_mr: - get_logger().info(f"Skipping draft MR: {mr_url}") - return True - return False @router.post("/webhook") async def gitlab_webhook(background_tasks: BackgroundTasks, request: Request): @@ -100,7 +89,8 @@ secret = secret_provider.get_secret(request_token) if not secret: get_logger().warning(f"Empty secret retrieved, request_token: {request_token}") - return create_unauthorized_response() + return JSONResponse(status_code=status.HTTP_401_UNAUTHORIZED, + content=jsonable_encoder({"message": "unauthorized"})) try: secret_dict = json.loads(secret) gitlab_token = secret_dict["gitlab_token"] @@ -109,19 +99,19 @@ context["settings"].gitlab.personal_access_token = gitlab_token except Exception as e: get_logger().error(f"Failed to validate secret {request_token}: {e}") - return create_unauthorized_response() + return JSONResponse(status_code=status.HTTP_401_UNAUTHORIZED, content=jsonable_encoder({"message": "unauthorized"})) elif get_settings().get("GITLAB.SHARED_SECRET"): secret = get_settings().get("GITLAB.SHARED_SECRET") if not request.headers.get("X-Gitlab-Token") == secret: get_logger().error("Failed to validate secret") - return create_unauthorized_response() + return JSONResponse(status_code=status.HTTP_401_UNAUTHORIZED, content=jsonable_encoder({"message": "unauthorized"})) else: get_logger().error("Failed to validate secret") - return create_unauthorized_response() + return JSONResponse(status_code=status.HTTP_401_UNAUTHORIZED, content=jsonable_encoder({"message": "unauthorized"})) gitlab_token = get_settings().get("GITLAB.PERSONAL_ACCESS_TOKEN", None) if not gitlab_token: get_logger().error("No gitlab token found") - return create_unauthorized_response() + return JSONResponse(status_code=status.HTTP_401_UNAUTHORIZED, content=jsonable_encoder({"message": "unauthorized"})) get_logger().info("GitLab data", artifact=data) sender = data.get("user", {}).get("username", "unknown") @@ -131,28 +121,30 @@ sender_name = data.get("user", {}).get("name", "unknown").lower() if 'codium' in sender_name or 'bot_' in sender_name or 'bot-' in sender_name or '_bot' in sender_name or '-bot' in sender_name: get_logger().info(f"Skipping bot user: {sender_name}") - return create_success_response() + return JSONResponse(status_code=status.HTTP_200_OK, content=jsonable_encoder({"message": "success"})) log_context["sender"] = sender + should_skip_draft = get_settings().get("GITLAB.SKIP_DRAFT_MR", False) if data.get('object_kind') == 'merge_request' and data['object_attributes'].get('action') in ['open', 'reopen']: url = data['object_attributes'].get('url') draft = data['object_attributes'].get('draft') - - if should_skip_draft_mr(draft, url): - return create_success_response() - get_logger().info(f"New merge request: {url}") + + if draft and should_skip_draft: + get_logger().info(f"Skipping draft MR: {url}") + return JSONResponse(status_code=status.HTTP_200_OK, content=jsonable_encoder({"message": "success"})) The `should_skip_draft_mr` function could be simplified by returning the boolean expression directly, without using an if-else statement. pr_agent/servers/gitlab_webhook.py [83-88] def should_skip_draft_mr(draft: bool, mr_url: str): skip_draft_mr = get_settings().get("GITLAB.SKIP_DRAFT_MR", False) - if draft and skip_draft_mr: + should_skip = draft and skip_draft_mr + if should_skip: get_logger().info(f"Skipping draft MR: {mr_url}") - return True - return False + return should_skip Apply this suggestion Suggestion importance[1-10]: 6 Why: The suggestion simplifies the logic and improves readability of the function, which is a good practice for maintainability.	6
Best practice	Use a constant for the success message to improve maintainability Consider using a constant for the success status code (200) instead of hardcoding it. This improves maintainability and readability. pr_agent/servers/gitlab_webhook.py [26-27] def create_success_response(): return JSONResponse(status_code=status.HTTP_200_OK, content=jsonable_encoder({"message": "success"})) +SUCCESS_MESSAGE = "success" + +def create_success_response(): + return JSONResponse(status_code=status.HTTP_200_OK, content=jsonable_encoder({"message": SUCCESS_MESSAGE})) + Apply this suggestion Suggestion importance[1-10]: 5 Why: The suggestion improves code maintainability, but the impact is relatively minor as it only affects a single, simple function.	5
Best practice	Use a more descriptive variable name for better code readability Consider using a more descriptive variable name for `mr` to improve code readability. For example, `merge_request` would be more clear. pr_agent/servers/gitlab_webhook.py [147-150] if 'merge_request' in data: - mr = data['merge_request'] - url = mr.get('url') - draft = mr.get('draft') + merge_request = data['merge_request'] + url = merge_request.get('url') + draft = merge_request.get('draft') Apply this suggestion Suggestion importance[1-10]: 4 Why: While using more descriptive variable names is good practice, the impact here is minimal as the current name 'mr' is already somewhat clear in context.	4

Previous suggestions

✅ Suggestions up to commit 978c445

Category	Suggestion	Score
Maintainability	✅ Rename function to better reflect its specific purpose Suggestion Impact: The function name was changed from 'should_skip_mr' to 'should_skip_draft_mr' as suggested code diff: -def should_skip_mr(draft: bool, mr_url: str): +def should_skip_draft_mr(draft: bool, mr_url: str): Consider using a more descriptive name for the `should_skip_mr` function, such as `should_skip_draft_mr`, to better reflect its specific purpose of checking if a draft merge request should be skipped. pr_agent/servers/gitlab_webhook.py [78-83] -def should_skip_mr(draft: bool, mr_url: str): +def should_skip_draft_mr(draft: bool, mr_url: str): skip_draft_mr = get_settings().get("GITLAB.SKIP_DRAFT_MR", False) if draft and skip_draft_mr: get_logger().info(f"Skipping draft MR: {mr_url}") return True return False Suggestion importance[1-10]: 7 Why: The suggestion improves code readability and maintainability by proposing a more descriptive function name that accurately reflects its purpose.	7
Maintainability	✅ Extract repeated code into a separate function to reduce duplication Suggestion Impact: The suggestion was implemented by creating two new functions: create_success_response() and create_unauthorized_response(). These functions were then used throughout the code to replace repeated JSONResponse creations. code diff: +def create_success_response(): + return JSONResponse(status_code=status.HTTP_200_OK, content=jsonable_encoder({"message": "success"})) + +def create_unauthorized_response(): + return JSONResponse(status_code=status.HTTP_401_UNAUTHORIZED, content=jsonable_encoder({"message": "unauthorized"})) Consider extracting the repeated JSONResponse creation into a separate function to reduce code duplication and improve maintainability. pr_agent/servers/gitlab_webhook.py [139-143] +def create_success_response(): + return JSONResponse(status_code=status.HTTP_200_OK, content=jsonable_encoder({"message": "success"})) + if should_skip_mr(draft, url): - return JSONResponse(status_code=status.HTTP_200_OK, content=jsonable_encoder({"message": "success"})) + return create_success_response() get_logger().info(f"New merge request: {url}") await _perform_commands_gitlab("pr_commands", PRAgent(), url, log_context) Suggestion importance[1-10]: 6 Why: The suggestion improves code maintainability by reducing duplication, but it's a minor optimization that doesn't address a critical issue.	6
Best practice	Use a constant for repeated string values to improve maintainability Consider using a constant for the success message "success" to improve maintainability and reduce the risk of typos in multiple occurrences. pr_agent/servers/gitlab_webhook.py [139-140] +SUCCESS_MESSAGE = "success" + if should_skip_mr(draft, url): - return JSONResponse(status_code=status.HTTP_200_OK, content=jsonable_encoder({"message": "success"})) + return JSONResponse(status_code=status.HTTP_200_OK, content=jsonable_encoder({"message": SUCCESS_MESSAGE})) Suggestion importance[1-10]: 4 Why: While using a constant can improve maintainability, the benefit is minimal in this case as the string is only used twice in the visible code.	4

mrT23 · 2024-08-22T15:09:11Z

@paolomainardi
simplify and shorten this PR.
I prefer not to do 'refactoring' of some sort and logic change in the same PR.
Also, there is no need for configuration control for something that obvious. dead configurations are a burden.

The PR should be four lines. something like:

draft = data['object_attributes'].get('draft')

if draft:
   get_logger().debug(...)
    return JSONResponse(status_code=status.HTTP_200_OK, content=jsonable_encoder({"message": "success"}))

paolomainardi · 2024-08-22T15:29:19Z

Ok @mrT23, I simplified it as requested and removed the refactoring part.

closes Codium-ai#1160

mrT23 · 2024-08-22T19:06:52Z

pr_agent/settings/configuration.toml

@@ -230,6 +230,7 @@ push_commands = [
    "/describe",
    "/review --pr_reviewer.num_code_suggestions=0",
 ]
+skip_draft_mr = false


remove this. it's a dead configuration. should be 'true' always
(and putting something by default as 'False' is like saying that no one will ever use it. We do want to use it)

I don't know what do you mean by "dead configuration", there are tons of "false" in the default settings file, maybe I am missing something.

This line serves to:

Let the users know that configuration exists and that the default is false. Otherwise where are documented ?

If we set it to true it means introducing a breaking change, as now draft requests are handled as the others. I did it on purpose.

dead configuration means something so exotic that 99.9% of PR-agent users won't ever change.
And in addition, here you have (for a 'dead configuration') a wrong default value.

A change is for the entire community. And its usage should be from the viewpoint of the entire community, and the entire code repo.

Since the correct behaviour is to avoid draft PRs (this is already done, without config, in github) we should do it also in Gitlab.

if possible and logical, the best configuration is no configuration.

So, to ensure I understood it well, are you proposing to always skip draft MR without having any configuration toggle?

There could be use cases where you want it enabled, and dropping it entirely seems a bit drastic.

I still don't understand why default to false should be a "wrong value."

@mrT23 anyway, just committed a version without any configuration toggle, we always skip it when the MR is in draft status.

paolomainardi · 2024-08-22T19:31:23Z

/describe

codiumai-pr-agent-pro · 2024-08-22T19:31:39Z

PR-Agent was enabled for this repository. To continue using it, please link your git user with your CodiumAI identity here.

PR Description updated to latest commit (8793f8d)

Copy walkthrough table to "Files Changed" Tab

paolomainardi · 2024-08-22T19:33:49Z

/review

codiumai-pr-agent-pro · 2024-08-22T19:34:01Z

PR Reviewer Guide 🔍

⏱️ Estimated effort to review: 2 🔵🔵⚪⚪⚪
🏅 Score: 95
🧪 No relevant tests
🔒 No security concerns identified
🔀 No multiple PR themes
⚡ Key issues to review Code Duplication The draft checking logic is duplicated for both new merge requests and comments. Consider extracting this logic into a separate function to improve maintainability.

paolomainardi · 2024-08-22T20:14:15Z

/describe

codiumai-pr-agent-pro · 2024-08-22T20:14:30Z

PR Description updated to latest commit (3778cc2)

Copy walkthrough table to "Files Changed" Tab

mrT23 · 2024-08-23T07:42:47Z

thanks @paolomainardi

paolomainardi · 2024-08-26T10:15:41Z

@mrT23 I am wondering if it is ok the scenario where we don't process comments when the MR is in the draft status; I see scenarios where you are developing and /improve could be very useful before changing it to the ready state.

What do you think @mrT23 ? If I understood correctly, the GitHub app excludes just the MR open event when in the draft.

mrT23 · 2024-08-26T12:22:25Z

people can always do online commenting

we are talking here about auto comments

paolomainardi · 2024-08-26T12:45:12Z

This MR inhibits manual comments even when the MR is in draft.

UPDATE: #1165 - With this, MR comments are processed again.

codiumai-pr-agent-pro bot added the enhancement New feature or request label Aug 22, 2024

codiumai-pr-agent-pro bot added the Review effort [1-5]: 2 label Aug 22, 2024

feat: Handle the gitlab MR draft status

ffaf5d5

closes Codium-ai#1160

paolomainardi force-pushed the feature/1160_gitlab_mr_draft_skip branch from 055c4cd to ffaf5d5 Compare August 22, 2024 15:29

mrT23 reviewed Aug 22, 2024

View reviewed changes

paolomainardi added 2 commits August 22, 2024 21:13

Update gitlab_webhook.py

61837c6

Update gitlab_webhook.py

8793f8d

feat: skip draft by default

3778cc2

paolomainardi changed the title ~~feat: Handle the gitlab MR draft status~~ feat: handle the gitlab MR draft status Aug 22, 2024

paolomainardi changed the title ~~feat: handle the gitlab MR draft status~~ feat: handle gitlab MR draft status Aug 22, 2024

mrT23 approved these changes Aug 23, 2024

View reviewed changes

mrT23 merged commit 4f1dccf into Codium-ai:main Aug 23, 2024
2 checks passed

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

feat: handle gitlab MR draft status #1165

feat: handle gitlab MR draft status #1165

paolomainardi commented Aug 22, 2024 •

edited by codiumai-pr-agent-pro bot

Loading

codiumai-pr-agent-pro bot commented Aug 22, 2024

codiumai-pr-agent-pro bot commented Aug 22, 2024 •

edited

Loading

paolomainardi commented Aug 22, 2024

codiumai-pr-agent-pro bot commented Aug 22, 2024

paolomainardi commented Aug 22, 2024

paolomainardi commented Aug 22, 2024

codiumai-pr-agent-pro bot commented Aug 22, 2024 •

edited

Loading

mrT23 commented Aug 22, 2024 •

edited

Loading

paolomainardi commented Aug 22, 2024

mrT23 Aug 22, 2024

paolomainardi Aug 22, 2024 •

edited

Loading

mrT23 Aug 22, 2024 •

edited

Loading

paolomainardi Aug 22, 2024 •

edited

Loading

paolomainardi Aug 22, 2024 •

edited

Loading

paolomainardi commented Aug 22, 2024

codiumai-pr-agent-pro bot commented Aug 22, 2024

paolomainardi commented Aug 22, 2024

codiumai-pr-agent-pro bot commented Aug 22, 2024

paolomainardi commented Aug 22, 2024

codiumai-pr-agent-pro bot commented Aug 22, 2024

mrT23 commented Aug 23, 2024

paolomainardi commented Aug 26, 2024

mrT23 commented Aug 26, 2024

paolomainardi commented Aug 26, 2024 •

edited

Loading

feat: handle gitlab MR draft status #1165

feat: handle gitlab MR draft status #1165

Conversation

paolomainardi commented Aug 22, 2024 • edited by codiumai-pr-agent-pro bot Loading

User description

PR Type

Description

Changes walkthrough 📝

codiumai-pr-agent-pro bot commented Aug 22, 2024

PR Reviewer Guide 🔍

codiumai-pr-agent-pro bot commented Aug 22, 2024 • edited Loading

PR Code Suggestions ✨

paolomainardi commented Aug 22, 2024

codiumai-pr-agent-pro bot commented Aug 22, 2024

PR Reviewer Guide 🔍

paolomainardi commented Aug 22, 2024

paolomainardi commented Aug 22, 2024

codiumai-pr-agent-pro bot commented Aug 22, 2024 • edited Loading

PR Code Suggestions ✨

Previous suggestions

mrT23 commented Aug 22, 2024 • edited Loading

paolomainardi commented Aug 22, 2024

mrT23 Aug 22, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

paolomainardi Aug 22, 2024 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mrT23 Aug 22, 2024 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

paolomainardi Aug 22, 2024 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

paolomainardi Aug 22, 2024 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

paolomainardi commented Aug 22, 2024

codiumai-pr-agent-pro bot commented Aug 22, 2024

paolomainardi commented Aug 22, 2024

codiumai-pr-agent-pro bot commented Aug 22, 2024

PR Reviewer Guide 🔍

paolomainardi commented Aug 22, 2024

codiumai-pr-agent-pro bot commented Aug 22, 2024

mrT23 commented Aug 23, 2024

paolomainardi commented Aug 26, 2024

mrT23 commented Aug 26, 2024

paolomainardi commented Aug 26, 2024 • edited Loading

paolomainardi commented Aug 22, 2024 •

edited by codiumai-pr-agent-pro bot

Loading

codiumai-pr-agent-pro bot commented Aug 22, 2024 •

edited

Loading

codiumai-pr-agent-pro bot commented Aug 22, 2024 •

edited

Loading

mrT23 commented Aug 22, 2024 •

edited

Loading

paolomainardi Aug 22, 2024 •

edited

Loading

mrT23 Aug 22, 2024 •

edited

Loading

paolomainardi Aug 22, 2024 •

edited

Loading

paolomainardi Aug 22, 2024 •

edited

Loading

paolomainardi commented Aug 26, 2024 •

edited

Loading