Skip to content

Navigation Menu

Sign in
Appearance settings

Search code, repositories, users, issues, pull requests...

Provide feedback

We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Sign up
Appearance settings

Migrate PR review workflow to use extensions action#347

Open
neubig wants to merge 9 commits intomain from
openhands/migrate-pr-review-to-extensions
Open

Migrate PR review workflow to use extensions action #347
neubig wants to merge 9 commits intomain from
openhands/migrate-pr-review-to-extensions

Conversation

@neubig
Copy link
Contributor

@neubig neubig commented Feb 18, 2026
edited
Loading

Summary

Migrate the PR review workflow to use the centralized action from OpenHands/extensions.

Changes

  • Replace inline workflow steps with OpenHands/extensions/plugins/pr-review@main composite action
  • Simplifies workflow from ~100 lines to ~30 lines
  • Uses same configuration (LLM model, review style, secrets)

Benefits

  1. Centralized maintenance - Updates to the review logic only need to happen in one place
  2. Consistent behavior - All repos use the same review action
  3. Simpler workflows - Individual repos just configure inputs, not implementation details

Testing

The action has been tested on the extensions repo itself via PR #61.

This PR updates the PR review workflow to use the composite action from
OpenHands/extensions instead of OpenHands/software-agent-sdk.
Changes:
- Updated action reference from software-agent-sdk to extensions/plugins/pr-review
NOTE: This PR should be merged AFTER OpenHands/extensions#54
is merged to ensure the action is available.
Co-authored-by: openhands <openhands@all-hands.dev>
@neubig neubig force-pushed the openhands/migrate-pr-review-to-extensions branch from b81beb1 to cd2910d Compare February 18, 2026 14:56
@neubig neubig marked this pull request as ready for review February 19, 2026 17:58
Copy link
Contributor

@all-hands-bot all-hands-bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🟡 Acceptable - Refactor is straightforward, but merge ordering creates unnecessary risk.

Verdict: The path change itself is fine, but this creates a landmine if merged before the dependency is ready. See inline comments.

Copy link
Contributor

@all-hands-bot all-hands-bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🟡 Acceptable - Trivial path change, but test it before merging.

Verdict: The change is fine if the path is correct. Since the dependency is merged, stop theorizing and just test it.

This adds the evaluation workflow that runs when PRs are closed to assess
how well review comments were addressed. Uses OpenHands/extensions plugin.
Co-authored-by: openhands <openhands@all-hands.dev>
Copy link
Contributor

@all-hands-bot all-hands-bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🟡 Acceptable - Path change is straightforward, but the new evaluation workflow adds significant untested complexity with multiple external dependencies.

@neubig neubig marked this pull request as draft February 19, 2026 18:26
Replace full evaluation workflow with minimal stub that calls
OpenHands/extensions/.github/workflows/pr-review-evaluation-reusable.yml
This centralizes evaluation logic in the extensions repo for easier maintenance.
Co-authored-by: openhands <openhands@all-hands.dev>
Address security review feedback - only pass the specific secrets needed.
Co-authored-by: openhands <openhands@all-hands.dev>
Simplify by having the complete workflow directly instead of calling
a reusable workflow. Still references extensions repo for the
evaluation script.
Co-authored-by: openhands <openhands@all-hands.dev>
- Pass trace file path directly to script instead of copying
- Only upload *.log files to avoid redundant artifact uploads
Co-authored-by: openhands <openhands@all-hands.dev>
Ensure pr-review-by-openhands.yml and pr-review-evaluation.yml match
the canonical versions in OpenHands/extensions.
Co-authored-by: openhands <openhands@all-hands.dev>
@neubig neubig marked this pull request as ready for review February 19, 2026 23:37
@neubig neubig changed the title (削除) DRAFT: Migrate PR review workflow to use extensions repo (削除ここまで) (追記) Migrate PR review workflow to use extensions action (追記ここまで) Feb 19, 2026
Copy link
Contributor

@all-hands-bot all-hands-bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🟡 Acceptable - Path change is trivial, but the evaluation workflow introduces stability risks.

Only run evaluation for merged PRs, not closed-but-not-merged ones.
Co-authored-by: openhands <openhands@all-hands.dev>
Closed-but-not-merged PRs are valuable for evaluation:
if the review identified critical issues causing closure,
that's evidence of effective review.
Co-authored-by: openhands <openhands@all-hands.dev>
Copy link
Contributor

@all-hands-bot all-hands-bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🟡 Acceptable - Migration is solid, evaluation workflow has minor pragmatic issues.

runs-on: ubuntu-24.04
env:
PR_NUMBER: ${{ github.event.pull_request.number }}
REPO_NAME: ${{ github.repository }}
Copy link
Contributor

@all-hands-bot all-hands-bot Feb 20, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🟡 Suggestion - Unused Variable: PR_MERGED is captured but never used in the workflow. Either use it to conditionally run evaluation (line 69-76), or remove it.

If you want to evaluate all closed PRs regardless of merge status, this is fine and you can ignore this comment. But if evaluation is only meaningful for merged PRs, add a condition.

if: always() && steps.check-trace.outputs.trace_exists == 'true'
with:
name: pr-review-evaluation-${{ github.event.pull_request.number }}
path: '*.log'
Copy link
Contributor

@all-hands-bot all-hands-bot Feb 20, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🟡 Suggestion - Implicit Contract: The *.log pattern assumes the evaluation script creates .log files in the working directory. This is fragile - if the script changes its logging behavior or location, artifacts silently disappear.

Consider either:

  1. Document this contract in a comment
  2. Have the script output a known filename
  3. Upload the entire working directory or a specific subdirectory

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@all-hands-bot all-hands-bot all-hands-bot left review comments

@juanmichelini juanmichelini Awaiting requested review from juanmichelini

At least 1 approving review is required to merge this pull request.

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Comments

AltStyle によって変換されたページ (->オリジナル) /