Adding the points allocated to users in a PR comment #131

LavanyaK235 · 2025-12-12T19:07:53Z

Adding the points allocated to users in a PR comment

Copilot

Pull request overview

This pull request introduces an automated contributor points tracking system that monitors PR activity and displays point allocations in PR comments. The system replaces a previous leaderboard-based approach with real-time point tracking directly on PRs, calculating points for reviews, approvals, merged PRs, and various bonus categories like bug fixes, security improvements, and documentation contributions.

Key Changes:

Implements a comprehensive Python-based points tracking script that monitors multiple GitHub events (reviews, comments, PR lifecycle events)
Replaces file-based leaderboard updates with dynamic PR comment updates showing live point tracking
Expands point categories to include performance improvements, security fixes, and first-time contributor bonuses

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 3 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated 18 comments.

File	Description
scripts/track_points.py	New 520-line Python script implementing the core points calculation logic, GitHub API integration, and PR comment management
scripts/config_points.yml	Updated configuration file expanding point categories from 4 to 10+ types, adding security, performance, and documentation bonuses
.github/workflows/points.yml	Refactored workflow to trigger on more event types (pull_request, issues, etc.) and execute the new tracking script instead of creating leaderboard PRs

Copilot · 2025-12-12T19:13:37Z

.github/workflows/points.yml

@@ -1,29 +1,37 @@
-name: Points Allocation
+name: Contributor Points Tracker


This GitHub Actions workflow file is missing the required Microsoft copyright header. According to repository standards, all source files including workflow YAML files should start with a copyright header before any other content.

Copilot · 2025-12-12T19:13:37Z

scripts/track_points.py

+    except Exception as e:
+        print(f"ERROR: GitHub API request failed: {e}", file=sys.stderr)
+        return {}


The error handling in this function catches all exceptions and returns an empty dictionary, which can mask genuine errors like authentication failures or network issues. This makes debugging difficult. Consider logging the specific error type and re-raising critical errors (like authentication failures) or at least returning an error indicator so the caller knows the request failed versus legitimately returning an empty result.

Copilot · 2025-12-12T19:13:38Z

scripts/track_points.py

+    # Keywords that link issues: closes, fixes, resolves (case-insensitive)
+    import re
+    # Pattern matches: "closes #123", "fixes #456", "resolves #789", etc.
+    pattern = r'(?:close[sd]?|fix(?:e[sd])?|resolve[sd]?)\s*:?\s*#(\d+)'


This regex pattern has a potential issue: it will match partial words. For example, "closed" would match both "close" and "closed", and "fixing" would match "fix". While the current pattern uses word boundaries implicitly through the grouping, it could still match unintended variations. Consider using more precise patterns like r'\b(closes?|fixe[sd]|resolved?)\s*:?\s*#(\d+)' to ensure proper word boundaries.

Suggested change

pattern = r'(?:close[sd]?|fix(?:e[sd])?|resolve[sd]?)\s*:?\s*#(\d+)'

pattern = r'\b(closes?|fixe[sd]|resolved?)\b\s*:?\s*#(\d+)'

Copilot · 2025-12-12T19:13:38Z

scripts/track_points.py

+def is_first_time_contributor(username: str, current_pr_number: int) -> bool:
+    """Check if the current PR is the user's first merged PR."""
+    # Check if user has any other merged PRs (excluding current one)
+    # Limit to recent 100 PRs to avoid API rate limits and performance issues
+    try:
+        search_result = github_api_request('GET', f'pulls?state=all&creator={username}&per_page=100')
+        if isinstance(search_result, list):
+            # Get all merged PRs excluding the current one
+            other_merged_prs = [
+                pr for pr in search_result 
+                if pr.get('merged_at') and pr.get('number') != current_pr_number
+            ]
+            # First-time contributor if no other merged PRs exist
+            return len(other_merged_prs) == 0
+    except Exception as e:
+        print(f"WARNING: Error checking first-time contributor status: {e}", file=sys.stderr)
+    return False


This API call could cause rate limit issues for repositories with many PRs from a single user. The function limits to 100 PRs but doesn't implement pagination or rate limit handling. Additionally, checking if a user is a first-time contributor by fetching all their PRs is inefficient. Consider using the GitHub API's contributor statistics endpoint or checking the 'author_association' field which indicates 'FIRST_TIME_CONTRIBUTOR' status.

Suggested change

def is_first_time_contributor(username: str, current_pr_number: int) -> bool:

"""Check if the current PR is the user's first merged PR."""

# Check if user has any other merged PRs (excluding current one)

# Limit to recent 100 PRs to avoid API rate limits and performance issues

try:

search_result = github_api_request('GET', f'pulls?state=all&creator={username}&per_page=100')

if isinstance(search_result, list):

# Get all merged PRs excluding the current one

other_merged_prs = [

pr for pr in search_result

if pr.get('merged_at') and pr.get('number') != current_pr_number

]

# First-time contributor if no other merged PRs exist

return len(other_merged_prs) == 0

except Exception as e:

print(f"WARNING: Error checking first-time contributor status: {e}", file=sys.stderr)

return False

def is_first_time_contributor(pr_details: dict) -> bool:

"""

Check if the PR author is a first-time contributor using the 'author_association' field.

Returns True if the author_association is 'FIRST_TIME_CONTRIBUTOR'.

"""

author_association = pr_details.get('author_association', '')

return author_association.upper() == 'FIRST_TIME_CONTRIBUTOR'

Copilot · 2025-12-12T19:13:38Z

scripts/track_points.py

+    if not has_security:
+        for issue in linked_issues:
+            issue_labels = [label['name'].lower() for label in issue.get('labels', [])]
+            if any('security' in label or 'vulnerability' in label for label in issue_labels):
+                has_security = True
+                breakdown_source = f'closes issue #{issue["number"]}'
+                break
+    else:
+        breakdown_source = 'PR labeled'
+
+    # Award security bonus only once
+    if has_security:
+        bonus = config['points'].get('security_fix', 15)
+        points += bonus
+        breakdown.append(f'Security fix ({breakdown_source}): +{bonus} points')


The variable name 'breakdown_source' is defined inside a conditional block but may be referenced outside of it. If 'has_security' is True but was set from PR labels (lines 210-221), the variable 'breakdown_source' is assigned on line 221. However, if the logic changes or the flow is unclear, this could lead to an UnboundLocalError. Consider initializing 'breakdown_source' before the conditional blocks to ensure it's always defined when used on line 227.

Copilot · 2025-12-12T19:13:40Z

scripts/track_points.py

+    pr_number = pr_details.get('number')
+
+    # Keywords that link issues: closes, fixes, resolves (case-insensitive)
+    import re


The import statement for the 're' module is placed inside a function rather than at the top of the file with other imports. This violates PEP 8 style guidelines which recommend placing all imports at the top of the module. Move this import to line 38 with the other standard library imports.

Copilot · 2025-12-12T19:13:40Z

scripts/track_points.py

+def aggregate_contributor_points(reviews: List[dict], comments: List[dict], pr_details: dict, config: dict) -> Dict[str, dict]:
+    """
+    Aggregate points for all contributors on a PR.
+    
+    Returns:
+        Dict mapping username to {'total': int, 'activities': [list of activity dicts]}
+    """
+    contributors = {}
+
+    # Process reviews
+    for review in reviews:
+        username = review['user']['login']
+        if username not in contributors:
+            contributors[username] = {'total': 0, 'activities': []}
+
+        points, breakdown = calculate_review_points(review, config)
+        contributors[username]['total'] += points
+        contributors[username]['activities'].append({
+            'type': 'review',
+            'points': points,
+            'breakdown': breakdown,
+            'timestamp': review['submitted_at'],
+            'state': review['state']
+        })
+
+    # Add PR author points (if PR is merged or has special labels)
+    pr_author = pr_details.get('user', {}).get('login')
+    if pr_author:
+        author_points, author_breakdown = calculate_pr_author_points(pr_details, config)
+        if author_points > 0:
+            if pr_author not in contributors:
+                contributors[pr_author] = {'total': 0, 'activities': []}
+
+            contributors[pr_author]['total'] += author_points
+            contributors[pr_author]['activities'].append({
+                'type': 'pr_author',
+                'points': author_points,
+                'breakdown': author_breakdown,
+                'timestamp': pr_details.get('merged_at') or pr_details.get('created_at')
+            })
+
+    return contributors


The function 'aggregate_contributor_points' receives a 'comments' parameter but never uses it. The function's docstring says it aggregates points from "reviews, comments, and pr_details", but the implementation only processes reviews and PR author points - not individual comments. Either implement comment processing (as documented in the module docstring on line 23) or remove the unused parameter and update the docstring.

Copilot · 2025-12-12T19:13:41Z

scripts/track_points.py

+    """Get issues linked to this PR by checking PR body for closing keywords."""
+    linked_issues = []
+    pr_body = pr_details.get('body', '') or ''
+    pr_number = pr_details.get('number')


Variable pr_number is not used.

Suggested change

pr_number = pr_details.get('number')

Copilot · 2025-12-12T19:13:41Z

scripts/track_points.py

+
+    if existing_comment_id:
+        # Update existing comment
+        result = github_api_request('PATCH', f'issues/comments/{existing_comment_id}', {'body': body})


Variable result is not used.

Suggested change

result = github_api_request('PATCH', f'issues/comments/{existing_comment_id}', {'body': body})

github_api_request('PATCH', f'issues/comments/{existing_comment_id}', {'body': body})

Copilot · 2025-12-12T19:13:41Z

scripts/track_points.py

+        print(f"✅ Updated tracking comment (ID: {existing_comment_id})")
+    else:
+        # Create new comment
+        result = github_api_request('POST', f'issues/{pr_number}/comments', {'body': body})
+        print(f"✅ Created new tracking comment")
+


Variable result is not used.

Suggested change

print(f"✅ Updated tracking comment (ID: {existing_comment_id})")

else:

# Create new comment

result = github_api_request('POST', f'issues/{pr_number}/comments', {'body': body})

print(f"✅ Created new tracking comment")

if isinstance(result, dict) and 'id' in result:

print(f"✅ Updated tracking comment (ID: {result['id']})")

else:

print(f"⚠️ Failed to update tracking comment (ID: {existing_comment_id}) - API response: {result}")

else:

# Create new comment

result = github_api_request('POST', f'issues/{pr_number}/comments', {'body': body})

if isinstance(result, dict) and 'id' in result:

print(f"✅ Created new tracking comment (ID: {result['id']})")

else:

print(f"⚠️ Failed to create tracking comment - API response: {result}")

rahuldevikar761 · 2025-12-12T20:04:33Z

scripts/track_points.py

+    """Make GitHub API request."""
+    url = f"https://api.github.com/repos/{GITHUB_REPOSITORY}/{endpoint}"
+    headers = {
+        'Authorization': f'token {GITHUB_TOKEN}',


Tokens are not safe if we developers run this, they can fetch the token.

Adding the points allocated to users in a PR comment

72bc142

LavanyaK235 requested a review from a team as a code owner December 12, 2025 19:07

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings December 12, 2025 19:07

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of LavanyaK235 December 12, 2025 19:08 View session

Copilot AI reviewed Dec 12, 2025

View reviewed changes

rahuldevikar761 reviewed Dec 12, 2025

View reviewed changes

rahuldevikar761 approved these changes Dec 12, 2025

View reviewed changes

		@@ -1,29 +1,37 @@
		name: Points Allocation
		name: Contributor Points Tracker

	pattern = r'(?:close[sd]?\|fix(?:e[sd])?\|resolve[sd]?)\s:?\s#(\d+)'
	pattern = r'\b(closes?\|fixe[sd]\|resolved?)\b\s:?\s#(\d+)'

	result = github_api_request('PATCH', f'issues/comments/{existing_comment_id}', {'body': body})
	github_api_request('PATCH', f'issues/comments/{existing_comment_id}', {'body': body})

Adding the points allocated to users in a PR comment #131

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Adding the points allocated to users in a PR comment #131

Uh oh!

Conversation

LavanyaK235 commented Dec 12, 2025

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Reviewed changes

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Dec 12, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Dec 12, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Dec 12, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Dec 12, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Dec 12, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Dec 12, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Dec 12, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Dec 12, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Dec 12, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Dec 12, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

rahuldevikar761 Dec 12, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants