Missing pull-request review comments #6
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
If you're here and unaware, the OP has already developed a replacement: Backups create with this tool are available at: |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Upon closer inspection, it turns out that review-comments are missing from the backup. As issues are disabled on this repository, I'm adding a note to the README.md with a reference to this PR to document this.
An example is this "approve" by fanquake in 25723: bitcoin/bitcoin#25723 (review). The PR does not have any other comments besides this ACK and in the zw/bitcoin-gh-meta backup only the
25723-PR.jsonand25723.jsonfiles exist. The 25723-comments.json does not exist.I this case, the comment "only" contains an
ACK <hash>(which is important information if someone needs to go back and see who reviewed this PR). In other cases it might be a detailed description of the review and other approaches considered. I think it's important that these pull-request reviews are included.My guess is that this is a feature GitHub introduced in the last 9 years and it's not queried by the ghrip tool (last changed 9 years ago). While I got the ghrip tool running and did a full backup with it, I wasn't too keen on working my way through it to add that functionality.