fix: don't dim draft PRs so they're easy to spot - #28
Conversation
Drafts were dimmed (opacity-50) like stale/reviewed/merged PRs, which made users think their own drafts weren't listed at all — they were just faint and sorted low. A draft is your own active work-in-progress, not a de-prioritized PR, and it already carries a ✍️ marker. Drop isDraft from the dim condition so drafts render at full opacity. A merged former-draft still dims via isMerged. Fixes #25 Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
Warning Review limit reachedYou’ve reached a temporary PR review limit under our Fair Usage Limits Policy. Next review available in: 3 minutes Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available. How can I continue?After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews. How do review limits work?CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability. For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window. Please refer docs for additional details. Review details⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Comment |
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 2dcc6dfd91
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
| // Drafts are NOT dimmed: a draft is your own active work-in-progress, not a | ||
| // de-prioritized PR like stale/reviewed/merged ones. The ✍️ marker already | ||
| // flags it, and dimming made users think their drafts weren't listed (#25). | ||
| const isDimmed = (pr.hasReviewed && !pr.isAuthor) || isStale || pr.isBot || pr.isMerged; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When a draft is older than stalePRDays, isStale is still true, so the row continues to receive opacity-50 even though this change says drafts should not be dimmed. This leaves long-running own draft PRs grayed out in the exact case the fix is trying to avoid; apply the stale dimming only when !pr.isDraft if drafts should always stay visually prominent.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
1 participant
Why
#25 asked to "show own draft PRs." They were already listed in Mine/All — but dimmed (
opacity-50) exactly like stale/reviewed/merged PRs, so the reporter reasonably concluded they weren't there:What
Drop
pr.isDraftfrom theisDimmedcondition inPRItem.tsx. A draft is your own active work-in-progress — not a de-prioritized PR — and it already carries a ✍️ marker to identify it, so it doesn't need the faded treatment. A merged former-draft still dims viapr.isMerged.One-line behavioral change; sort order is unchanged (out of scope for what was reported).
Verification
npm run typecheck✅npm run lint✅npm run build✅Fixes #25
🤖 Generated with Claude Code