Reimplement Danger on pull_request_target (migrate to danger-pr-comment) #2630

Activity

1. numbata commented on Dec 7, 2025

   

   numbata

   on Dec 7, 2025

   Contributor

   More actions

   Something like this https://github.com/ruby-grape/grape/pull/2632/files ?
2. dblock commented on Dec 7, 2025

   

   dblock

   on Dec 7, 2025

   MemberAuthor

   More actions

   Yes, if you can make it work @numbata !
3. numbata commented on Dec 8, 2025

   

   numbata

   on Dec 8, 2025

   Contributor

   More actions

   I’ve added some changes to danger-changelog#65, which means we won’t need to reimplement the changelog plugin in our Dangerfile as I did in my draft PR.

   Once that is merged, we can move forward with merging this PR: ruby-grape/danger#14, …and then bump the ruby-grape-danger version.
4. numbata commented on Dec 9, 2025

   

   numbata

   on Dec 9, 2025

   Contributor

   More actions

   For transparency, my plan is:

   • Remove the requirement for github_token from danger-changelog
     Add support for running changelog checks without GitHub API token dblock/danger-changelog#65
   • Release a new version of danger-changelog
   • Remove the toc! check (which also requires github_token) from the Dangerfile
     remove TOC check for README danger#14
   • Bump the minimum danger-changelog version for ruby-grape-danger
   • Release ruby-grape-danger
   • Simplify the GitHub workflow based on these changes here:
     Remove API token requirement from Danger workflow #2632
   • Roll out the updated workflow across the grape-* gems
5. dblock commented on Dec 9, 2025

   

   dblock

   on Dec 9, 2025

   MemberAuthor

   More actions

   Sounds great @numbata, I merged dblock/danger-changelog#65
6. dblock commented on Dec 30, 2025

   

   dblock

   on Dec 30, 2025

   MemberAuthor

   More actions

   @numbata does it make sense to still have ruby-grape-danger?

   I got rid of the similar one in slack-ruby-client and did the migration with claude's help

       migrate Danger to use danger-pr-comment workflow similar to https://github.com/slack-ruby/slack-ruby-client/pull/581 and https://github.com/slack-ruby/slack-ruby-bot-server/pull/181
       make sure to include danger, danger-pr-comment, danger-changelog and danger-toc in Gemfile
       make sure to changelog.check! and toc.check! in Dangerfile
       get rid of Danger.gemfile if it's present
       commit, push, open a pr
       update changelog, amend
   
7. dblock

   changed the title [-]Reimplement Danger on pull_request_target[/-] [+]Reimplement Danger on pull_request_target (migrate to danger-pr-comment)[/+] on Dec 30, 2025
8. dblock commented on Dec 30, 2025

   

   dblock

   on Dec 30, 2025

   MemberAuthor

   More actions

   Repositories to Migrate to pull_request_target

   • grape
   • grape-swagger-entity
   • grape-roar
   • grape-swagger
   • grape-swagger-rails
   • grape-entity (optional - has Dangerfile but no workflow)
9. numbata commented on Dec 30, 2025

   

   numbata

   on Dec 30, 2025

   Last edited by numbata

   Contributor

   More actions

   @dblock It depends. If we want a shared "common" Dangerfile across all grape-* gems, then yeah, it makes sense so we can enforce TOC + changelog validation consistently.

   But for grape-oas I set changelog.format = :keep_a_changelog, so there’s no need for the ruby-grape-danger dependency there.
10. dblock commented on Dec 30, 2025

    

    dblock

    on Dec 30, 2025

    Last edited by dblock

    MemberAuthor

    More actions

    I say we kill it. Opened a bunch of PRs.

    • Migrate Danger to use danger-pr-comment workflow #2651
    • Don't use ruby-grape-danger grape-swagger-entity#89
    • Migrate Danger to use danger-pr-comment workflow grape-roar#35
    • Migrate Danger to use danger-pr-comment workflow grape-swagger#970
    • Migrate Danger to use danger-pr-comment workflow grape-swagger-rails#138

    👍React with 👍1Reacted by Andrei Subbota
11. dblock

    closed this as completedon Apr 2, 2026