Skip to content

Conversation

@Planeshifter
Copy link
Member

Resolves stdlib-js/metr-issue-tracker#131.

Description

What is the purpose of this pull request?

This pull request:

  • adds a workflow and script to label PRs with merge conflicts as such.

Related Issues

Does this pull request have any related issues?
None

Questions

Any questions for reviewers of this pull request?

As currently implemented, the script only fetches the latest 100 open PRs to process, with no pagination implemented. This seems sufficient to me to avoid having to deal with cursor-based pagination in the GitHub GraphQL API, but it's a caveat to keep in mind and which could be revisited if deemed necessary; one alternative would be to only process the PRs updated from the last workflow run.

Other

Any other information relevant to this pull request? This may include screenshots, references, and/or implementation notes.

No.

Checklist

Please ensure the following tasks are completed before submitting this pull request.

AI Assistance

When authoring the changes proposed in this PR, did you use any kind of AI assistance?

  • Yes
  • No

If you answered "yes" above, how did you use AI assistance?

  • Code generation (e.g., when writing an implementation or fixing a bug)
  • Test/benchmark generation
  • Documentation (including examples)
  • Research and understanding

Disclosure

If you answered "yes" to using AI assistance, please provide a short disclosure indicating how you used AI assistance. This helps reviewers determine how much scrutiny to apply when reviewing your contribution. Example disclosures: "This PR was written primarily by Claude Code." or "I consulted ChatGPT to understand the codebase, but the proposed changes were fully authored manually by myself.".


@stdlib-js/reviewers

@Planeshifter Planeshifter force-pushed the philipp/label-prs-with-merge-conflicts branch from c8d4a5c to c9e67ca Compare January 1, 2026 07:22
@Planeshifter Planeshifter marked this pull request as ready for review January 1, 2026 07:22
@Planeshifter Planeshifter requested a review from kgryte January 1, 2026 07:22
@stdlib-bot stdlib-bot added the Needs Review A pull request which needs code review. label Jan 1, 2026
@Planeshifter
Copy link
Member Author

/stdlib update-copyright-years

@stdlib-bot stdlib-bot added bot: In Progress Pull request is currently awaiting automation. and removed bot: In Progress Pull request is currently awaiting automation. labels Jan 1, 2026
@kgryte kgryte added CI Issue or pull request specific to continuous integration environments. and removed Needs Review A pull request which needs code review. labels Jan 3, 2026
Copy link
Member

@kgryte kgryte left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Overall, this looks good to me. Given the recent reorganization of scripts in .github/workflows, @Planeshifter do you want to go ahead and move the check_merge_conflicts_prs script to a sub-folder?

---
type: pre_commit_static_analysis_report
description: Results of running static analysis checks when committing changes.
report:
  - task: lint_filenames
    status: passed
  - task: lint_editorconfig
    status: passed
  - task: lint_markdown
    status: na
  - task: lint_package_json
    status: na
  - task: lint_repl_help
    status: na
  - task: lint_javascript_src
    status: na
  - task: lint_javascript_cli
    status: na
  - task: lint_javascript_examples
    status: na
  - task: lint_javascript_tests
    status: na
  - task: lint_javascript_benchmarks
    status: na
  - task: lint_python
    status: na
  - task: lint_r
    status: na
  - task: lint_c_src
    status: na
  - task: lint_c_examples
    status: na
  - task: lint_c_benchmarks
    status: na
  - task: lint_c_tests_fixtures
    status: na
  - task: lint_shell
    status: passed
  - task: lint_typescript_declarations
    status: passed
  - task: lint_typescript_tests
    status: na
  - task: lint_license_headers
    status: passed
---
---
type: pre_commit_static_analysis_report
description: Results of running static analysis checks when committing changes.
report:
  - task: lint_filenames
    status: passed
  - task: lint_editorconfig
    status: passed
  - task: lint_markdown
    status: na
  - task: lint_package_json
    status: na
  - task: lint_repl_help
    status: na
  - task: lint_javascript_src
    status: na
  - task: lint_javascript_cli
    status: na
  - task: lint_javascript_examples
    status: na
  - task: lint_javascript_tests
    status: na
  - task: lint_javascript_benchmarks
    status: na
  - task: lint_python
    status: na
  - task: lint_r
    status: na
  - task: lint_c_src
    status: na
  - task: lint_c_examples
    status: na
  - task: lint_c_benchmarks
    status: na
  - task: lint_c_tests_fixtures
    status: na
  - task: lint_shell
    status: passed
  - task: lint_typescript_declarations
    status: passed
  - task: lint_typescript_tests
    status: na
  - task: lint_license_headers
    status: passed
---
@Planeshifter Planeshifter force-pushed the philipp/label-prs-with-merge-conflicts branch from 638c10d to ef71923 Compare January 3, 2026 17:55
@socket-security
Copy link

socket-security bot commented Jan 3, 2026

Warning

Review the following alerts detected in dependencies.

According to your organization's Security Policy, it is recommended to resolve "Warn" alerts. Learn more about Socket for GitHub.

Action Severity Alert  (click "▶" to expand/collapse)
Warn Critical
Critical CVE: Unsafe defaults in npm remark-html``

CVE: GHSA-9q5w-79cv-947m Unsafe defaults in remark-html (CRITICAL)

Affected versions: = 14.0.0; < 13.0.2; >= 14.0.0 < 14.0.1

Patched version: 13.0.2

From: package.jsonnpm/remark-html@10.0.0

ℹ Read more on: This package | This alert | What is a critical CVE?

Next steps: Take a moment to review the security alert above. Review the linked package source code to understand the potential risk. Ensure the package is not malicious before proceeding. If you're unsure how to proceed, reach out to your security team or ask the Socket team for help at support@socket.dev.

Suggestion: Remove or replace dependencies that include known critical CVEs. Consumers can use dependency overrides or npm audit fix --force to remove vulnerable dependencies.

Mark the package as acceptable risk. To ignore this alert only in this pull request, reply with the comment @SocketSecurity ignore npm/remark-html@10.0.0. You can also ignore all packages with @SocketSecurity ignore-all. To ignore an alert for all future pull requests, use Socket's Dashboard to change the triage state of this alert.

View full report

@Planeshifter Planeshifter requested a review from kgryte January 3, 2026 17:56
@stdlib-bot stdlib-bot added the Needs Review A pull request which needs code review. label Jan 3, 2026
@Planeshifter
Copy link
Member Author

/stdlib update-copyright-years

@stdlib-bot stdlib-bot added the bot: In Progress Pull request is currently awaiting automation. label Jan 3, 2026
@stdlib-bot stdlib-bot removed the bot: In Progress Pull request is currently awaiting automation. label Jan 3, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

CI Issue or pull request specific to continuous integration environments. Needs Review A pull request which needs code review.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[RFC]: add GitHub Actions workflow to periodically auto-label PRs with merge conflicts

4 participants