feat: initial infra for slack intergration

[Shurtu-gal]

Description

• Sets up the initial infrastructure needed for Slack integration.

Tasks

• Initialise Terraform files
• Make a GitHub Workflow
• Test workflow on personal repo
• Add remaining channels and groups as required.
• Add slack handles in working groups.
• feat: add Maintainers Growth Working Group #1143

Related issue(s)
Fixes #1072

[Shurtu-gal]

@smoya The working groups part has also been done. Successful workflow runs can be viewed here.

Just needs to wait for the added comment #1143 (comment)

[aeworxet]

@asyncapi/bounty_team

[Shurtu-gal]

Two things left for this to function correctly:-

1. Add the SLACK_TOKEN secret. ( Can be taken from @smoya )
2. Merge this PR chore: fix working groups file #1203

It would be good to do it in this order as the workflow will run automatically.

cc: @derberg @thulieblack

[Shurtu-gal]

@derberg a possible workflow can be verification of WORKING_GROUPS.yaml file like we do for others.

[smoya]

@Shurtu-gal This PR shouldn't have been merged until everything properly configured.

Additionally, it seems it's failing here https://github.com/asyncapi/community/actions/runs/9002845962/job/24732067102#step:3:46

[Shurtu-gal]

@Shurtu-gal This PR shouldn't have been merged until everything properly configured.

Additionally, it seems it's failing here https://github.com/asyncapi/community/actions/runs/9002845962/job/24732067102#step:3:46

Yeah, the working group file has been changed in some other PR, just fixed it in #1203

[smoya]

@Shurtu-gal This PR shouldn't have been merged until everything properly configured.
Additionally, it seems it's failing here https://github.com/asyncapi/community/actions/runs/9002845962/job/24732067102#step:3:46

Yeah, the working group file has been changed in some other PR, just fixed it in #1203

Oh, gotcha. Didn't get it when reading your previous comment. Sorry 😓

[Shurtu-gal]

@derberg the only thing left is to add the slack token.

https://github.com/asyncapi/community/actions/runs/9011590065

[smoya]

@derberg the only thing left is to add the slack token.

https://github.com/asyncapi/community/actions/runs/9011590065

Token I shared with you @derberg via Slack DM. 🙏

[derberg]

I have only one small concern on token name
below you can see all tokens for slack that are globally available in AsyncAPI, and you see names more or less say what it is for. I'm afraid that if I add SLACK_TOKEN for this repo, we will quickly forget what it is for....although we can always search through code where it is used 🤔

[Shurtu-gal]

How about changing it to SLACK_INFRA_TOKEN ?

[derberg]

no strong opinion here - whatever you folks think is the best - even if not renaming is good, I'll accept your decision

[Shurtu-gal]

no strong opinion here - whatever you folks think is the best - even if not renaming is good, I'll accept your decision

I have changed it to SLACK_INFRA_TOKEN in #1205. Let me know if anyone has any other suggestions.

cc: @derberg

[derberg]

ok, secret SLACK_INFRA_TOKEN added

[Shurtu-gal]

@smoya there is some problem related to scope as can be seen in this run.

Have you given this scope to the token channels:write?

[smoya]

@smoya there is some problem related to scope as can be seen in this run.

Have you given this scope to the token channels:write?

You mention in the README that we should use a user bot. However, i dont think is needed, also not very secure.
I used a bot token and added the following roles:

• channels:join
• channels:manage
• channels:read
• groups:read
• groups:write
• usergroups:read
• usergroups:write

The changes got approved by @thulieblack now.

I guess we would need to update the README as well to mention the changes about the scopes

[Shurtu-gal]

@smoya there is some problem related to scope as can be seen in this run.
Have you given this scope to the token channels:write?

You mention in the README that we should use a user bot. However, i dont think is needed, also not very secure. I used a bot token and added the following roles:

* channels:join

* channels:manage

* channels:read

* groups:read

* groups:write

* usergroups:read

* usergroups:write

The changes got approved by @thulieblack now.

I guess we would need to update the README as well to mention the changes about the scopes

I will change the README.

[smoya]

Please @Shurtu-gal confirm it works now🙏

[Shurtu-gal]

@derberg can you rerun the workflow once.

[derberg]

sorry but which one? one of the latest from https://github.com/asyncapi/community/actions/workflows/slack-integration.yml?

[Shurtu-gal]

@derberg this one --> https://github.com/asyncapi/community/actions/runs/9077789960/job/24943426701#step:3:1454

[Shurtu-gal]

@smoya still not working https://github.com/asyncapi/community/actions/runs/9095277402/job/24998151071#step:3:1456. Could you try it once locally, if not maybe can try using user token as written in the README. WDYT ?

[derberg]

rerun: https://github.com/asyncapi/community/actions/runs/9077789960

[smoya]

Could you try it once locally

I ran this locally and got the same missing_scope errors. Will take a look at it; it is totally not ideal to use a user token here.

[Shurtu-gal]

Could you try it once locally

I ran this locally and got the same missing_scope errors. Will take a look at it; it is totally not ideal to use a user token here.

Just curious, what are the disadvantages with user_token as long as it's a bot user 🤔?

[smoya]

Just curious, what are the disadvantages with user_token as long as it's a bot user 🤔?

The need of having to maintain a new user, store the credentials somewhere, give permissions to that user, install the app through that user, etc, makes it so complicated VS using bot tokens, which are meant for that.

I checked this on my own workspace and indeed it seems only administrators will be able to do such a thing. The permission for creating channels and usergroups are managed globally in the workspace settings; atm for AsyncAPI Workspace, anyone can create channels but not usergroups, so that's what the bot token will be able to do, just as a any other regular user. More context:

We would need to move to the solution of having a dedicated user for this bot unfortunately.

@thulieblack how can we proceed with this? I know it is a pita, but there is no other solution if we really want this to happen.

cc @derberg

[Shurtu-gal]

Great @smoya. Do you mind if I put this QA in doc as it may prove to be useful later on.

[smoya]

Great @smoya. Do you mind if I put this QA in doc as it may prove to be useful later on.

Of course! 👍

[smoya]

Please let's move any future discussion into the open issue #1072