Skip to content

docs: drop the note that thread comments are disabled on private repositories - #492

Merged
shenxianpeng merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
bugfix/private-repo-thread-comments
Sep 30, 2026
Merged

shenxianpeng merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
bugfix/private-repo-thread-comments

Conversation

@shenxianpeng

@shenxianpeng shenxianpeng commented Sep 30, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

The thread-comments input said the feature is disabled on private repositories. cpp-linter has no such check any more: its requests ask for application/vnd.github.raw+json, which addressed #142, and nothing in rest_api looks at the repository's visibility.

Following @2bndy5's suggestion on cpp-linter/cpp-linter.github.io#62, I ran the action on a private repository in the organization, cpp-linter/test-cpp-linter-action-private, with thread-comments: update:

Round Push Result
1 code with one clang-format issue and two clang-tidy findings github-actions[bot] posted one "Cpp-Linter Report" comment (run 36699441415)
2 another function with findings the same comment was edited (3 concerns); no second comment (run 36699583265)
3 every finding fixed the comment was deleted, as no-lgtm: true asks (run 36699719604)

All three runs passed, and their logs show no error from posting, editing or deleting the comment (the ##[warning] lines are the file annotations for the findings). The workflow sets permissions: pull-requests: write; a repository whose default GITHUB_TOKEN is read-only needs that, as documented.

So the note is removed. The permissions note in docs/permissions.md (supply GITHUB_TOKEN on private repositories) stays; it is still true.

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Documentation
    • Updated the thread-comments input description by removing the note about private-repository limitations. No input settings or defaults changed.

@shenxianpeng
shenxianpeng requested a review from a team as a code owner September 30, 2026 10:01
@shenxianpeng
shenxianpeng requested review from 2bndy5 and removed request for a team September 30, 2026 10:01
@github-actions github-actions Bot added the bug Something isn't working label Sep 30, 2026
…sitories

The `thread-comments` input said the feature is disabled on private repositories. cpp-linter has no such check any more: its requests ask for `application/vnd.github.raw+json`, which addressed #142, and nothing in `rest_api` looks at the repository's visibility.

Following @2bndy5's suggestion on cpp-linter/cpp-linter.github.io#62, I ran the action on a private repository in the organization, cpp-linter/test-cpp-linter-action-private, with `thread-comments: update`:

| Round | Push | Result |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | code with one clang-format issue and two clang-tidy findings | github-actions[bot] posted one "Cpp-Linter Report" comment (run 36699441415) |
| 2 | another function with findings | the same comment was edited (3 concerns); no second comment (run 36699583265) |
| 3 | every finding fixed | the comment was deleted, as `no-lgtm: true` asks (run 36699719604) |

All three runs passed, and their logs show no error from posting, editing or deleting the comment (the `##[warning]` lines are the file annotations for the findings). The workflow sets `permissions: pull-requests: write`; a repository whose default `GITHUB_TOKEN` is read-only needs that, as [documented](https://github.com/cpp-linter/cpp-linter-action/blob/main/docs/permissions.md).

So the note is removed. The permissions note in `docs/permissions.md` (supply `GITHUB_TOKEN` on private repositories) stays; it is still true.
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Sep 30, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Cpp-Linter Report ⚠️

Some files did not pass the configured checks!

clang-format (v16.0.6) reports: 2 file(s) not formatted
  • docs/examples/demo/demo.hpp
  • docs/examples/demo/demo.cpp
clang-tidy (v16.0.6) reports: 7 concern(s)

Have any feedback or feature suggestions? Share it here.

@shenxianpeng
shenxianpeng force-pushed the bugfix/private-repo-thread-comments branch from 6d570d2 to 51b957a Compare September 30, 2026 10:02
@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Sep 30, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Review in Change Stack →

Navigate logical layers of code changes, visualize relationships, and explore their blast radius.

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Advanced

Run ID: babf8195-1c52-42d4-b053-9d079902a5c9

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 0e11333 and 51b957a.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • action.yml
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (1)
  • action.yml

Included review availability: This review used your included allowance. Your plan provides up to 2 included reviews per hour; 1 remain after this review.


Walkthrough

The thread-comments input description no longer states that thread comments are disabled on private repositories. Its declaration and default are unchanged.

Changes

Thread-comments description

Layer / File(s) Summary
Update input description
action.yml
The description no longer includes the note about private repositories. The input declaration and default are unchanged.

Priority: ⬇️ Low

Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~2 minutes

Merge Risk: ⚪ Minimal · up to 51b95

This documentation-only change preserves thread-comment behavior and permission requirements. No actionable merge-blocking risk remains.

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5
✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Description Check ✅ Passed Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check ✅ Passed The title clearly and concisely describes the main change: removing the note that thread comments are disabled on private repositories.
Docstring Coverage ✅ Passed No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff. Analyzed 0 functions across 0…
Linked Issues check ✅ Passed Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check ✅ Passed Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.

@shenxianpeng shenxianpeng added documentation Improvements or additions to documentation and removed bug Something isn't working labels Sep 30, 2026

@2bndy5 2bndy5 left a comment •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We can re-edit this again if we find discover something in tests

@shenxianpeng
shenxianpeng merged commit f2e4501 into main Sep 30, 2026
45 checks passed
@shenxianpeng
shenxianpeng deleted the bugfix/private-repo-thread-comments branch September 30, 2026 14:57
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

documentation Improvements or additions to documentation

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants