chore: create workflow to auto add labels to issues #10430

stnguyen90 · 2025-09-03T23:06:15Z

What does this PR do?

Create a GitHub workflow to automatically add labels to a GitHub issue based on title and body. The action uses .github/labeler.yml match a label using a regexp.

Test Plan

Tested using act:

gh act issues --eventpath event.json --bind="true"

with event.json

{
  "issue": {
    "number": 10428
  }
}

added "product / auth", "product / functions", and "sdk / cli" to issue appwrite/sdk-for-cli#194:

Related PRs and Issues

None

Checklist

Have you read the Contributing Guidelines on issues?
If the PR includes a change to an API's metadata (desc, label, params, etc.), does it also include updated API specs and example docs?

coderabbitai · 2025-09-03T23:06:21Z

Note

Other AI code review bot(s) detected

CodeRabbit has detected other AI code review bot(s) in this pull request and will avoid duplicating their findings in the review comments. This may lead to a less comprehensive review.

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

Adds a new GitHub labeler configuration at .github/labeler.yml defining 18 label-to-regex mappings for product areas and features (auth, realtime, console, storage, databases, functions, migrations, messaging, relationships, vcs, graphql, assistant, domains, locale, avatars, sites, sdk/cli, self-hosted). Adds a GitHub Actions workflow at .github/workflows/auto-label-issue.yml that triggers on newly opened issues and runs github/issue-labeler@v3.4 with configuration-path: .github/labeler.yml, include-title enabled, enable-versioned-regex disabled, and GITHUB_TOKEN from secrets.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~10 minutes

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests

Create PR with unit tests
Post copyable unit tests in a comment
Commit unit tests in branch chore-github-issue-auto-label

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

🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
- I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
- Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query.
PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
- @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
- @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.

Support

Need help? Create a ticket on our support page for assistance with any issues or questions.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR/Issue comments)

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

Other keywords and placeholders

Add @coderabbitai ignore or @coderabbit ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

Status, Documentation and Community

Visit our Status Page to check the current availability of CodeRabbit.
Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

github-actions · 2025-09-03T23:08:47Z

Security Scan Results for PR

Docker Image Scan Results

Package	Version	Vulnerability	Severity
binutils	2.42-r0	CVE-2025-0840	HIGH
git	2.45.3-r0	CVE-2025-46334	HIGH
git	2.45.3-r0	CVE-2025-48384	HIGH
git	2.45.3-r0	CVE-2025-48385	HIGH
git-init-template	2.45.3-r0	CVE-2025-46334	HIGH
git-init-template	2.45.3-r0	CVE-2025-48384	HIGH
git-init-template	2.45.3-r0	CVE-2025-48385	HIGH
icu	74.2-r0	CVE-2025-5222	HIGH
icu-data-en	74.2-r0	CVE-2025-5222	HIGH
icu-dev	74.2-r0	CVE-2025-5222	HIGH
icu-libs	74.2-r0	CVE-2025-5222	HIGH
libecpg	16.8-r0	CVE-2025-8714	HIGH
libecpg	16.8-r0	CVE-2025-8715	HIGH
libecpg-dev	16.8-r0	CVE-2025-8714	HIGH
libecpg-dev	16.8-r0	CVE-2025-8715	HIGH
libexpat	2.6.4-r0	CVE-2024-8176	HIGH
libpq	16.8-r0	CVE-2025-8714	HIGH
libpq	16.8-r0	CVE-2025-8715	HIGH
libpq-dev	16.8-r0	CVE-2025-8714	HIGH
libpq-dev	16.8-r0	CVE-2025-8715	HIGH
libxml2	2.12.7-r0	CVE-2024-56171	HIGH
libxml2	2.12.7-r0	CVE-2025-24928	HIGH
libxml2	2.12.7-r0	CVE-2025-27113	HIGH
libxml2	2.12.7-r0	CVE-2025-32414	HIGH
libxml2	2.12.7-r0	CVE-2025-32415	HIGH
postgresql16-dev	16.8-r0	CVE-2025-8714	HIGH
postgresql16-dev	16.8-r0	CVE-2025-8715	HIGH
pyc	3.12.9-r0	CVE-2024-12718	HIGH
pyc	3.12.9-r0	CVE-2025-4138	HIGH
pyc	3.12.9-r0	CVE-2025-4330	HIGH
pyc	3.12.9-r0	CVE-2025-4517	HIGH
python3	3.12.9-r0	CVE-2024-12718	HIGH
python3	3.12.9-r0	CVE-2025-4138	HIGH
python3	3.12.9-r0	CVE-2025-4330	HIGH
python3	3.12.9-r0	CVE-2025-4517	HIGH
python3-pyc	3.12.9-r0	CVE-2024-12718	HIGH
python3-pyc	3.12.9-r0	CVE-2025-4138	HIGH
python3-pyc	3.12.9-r0	CVE-2025-4330	HIGH
python3-pyc	3.12.9-r0	CVE-2025-4517	HIGH
python3-pycache-pyc0	3.12.9-r0	CVE-2024-12718	HIGH
python3-pycache-pyc0	3.12.9-r0	CVE-2025-4138	HIGH
python3-pycache-pyc0	3.12.9-r0	CVE-2025-4330	HIGH
python3-pycache-pyc0	3.12.9-r0	CVE-2025-4517	HIGH
sqlite-libs	3.45.3-r1	CVE-2025-29087	HIGH
xz	5.6.2-r0	CVE-2025-31115	HIGH
xz-libs	5.6.2-r0	CVE-2025-31115	HIGH
golang.org/x/crypto	v0.31.0	CVE-2025-22869	HIGH
golang.org/x/oauth2	v0.24.0	CVE-2025-22868	HIGH
stdlib	1.22.10	CVE-2025-47907	HIGH

Source Code Scan Results

🎉 No vulnerabilities found!

Copilot

Pull Request Overview

Creates a GitHub workflow to automatically label issues based on their title and body content. The workflow triggers when issues are opened and uses regex patterns to match appropriate labels.

Adds automated issue labeling workflow using GitHub's issue-labeler action
Configures comprehensive label mapping for various Appwrite product areas and features
Sets up appropriate permissions and debugging for the workflow

Reviewed Changes

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.

File	Description
.github/workflows/auto-label-issue.yml	GitHub workflow configuration for automatic issue labeling
.github/labeler.yml	Label mapping configuration with regex patterns for different product areas

_{Tip: Customize your code reviews with copilot-instructions.md. Create the file or learn how to get started.}

Copilot

Copilot encountered an error and was unable to review this pull request. You can try again by re-requesting a review.

coderabbitai

Actionable comments posted: 0

Caution

Some comments are outside the diff and can’t be posted inline due to platform limitations.

⚠️ Outside diff range comments (1)

.github/labeler.yml (1)

1-84: Add missing labels referenced in .github/labeler.yml. The following labels are absent and must be created before merging:

api / graphql

product / assistant

product / locale

product / avatars

product / sites

sdk / cli

Verify labeler workflow config. Ensure your .github/workflows/labeler.yml uses github/issue-labeler v3.4 with include-title: 1 (and consider sync-labels: 1 for proper de-labeling).

🧹 Nitpick comments (7)

.github/labeler.yml (7)
1-4: Broaden auth matches; drop redundant term.

Covers core terms well, but will miss common variants (sign-in/up, passkeys, OTP, WebAuthn). Also, oauth2 is redundant because oauth matches it. Suggest updating the regex.
-  - "(auth|session|login|logout|register|2fa|mfa|users|teams|memberships|invite|oauth|oauth2|sso|jwt)"
+  - "(auth|session|login|signin|sign-in|logout|register|signup|sign-up|password|reset|recovery|verification|verify|2fa|mfa|otp|totp|webauthn|passkey|users?|teams?|memberships?|invitation|invite|oauth|sso|jwt)"
Reference config format for this action looks correct. (github.com)

6-8: Handle singular ‘websocket’.

Add singular to avoid missing “websocket connection” in titles/bodies.
-  - "(realtime|subscribe|websockets)"
+  - "(realtime|subscribe|websocket|websockets)"
49-52: Avoid false positives with “push” (push notifications vs git push).

push alone will over-label messaging issues as VCS. Replace with more VCS-specific terms.
-  - "(repo|push|vcs|repository)"
+  - "(git|repo|repository|commit|branch|merge|pull request|pr|tag|release|vcs)"
73-76: De-duplicate domains/SSL between “domains” and “sites”.

This prevents double-labeling for the same keywords.
-  - "(site|web|hosting|domain|ssl|certificate|nextjs|nuxt|react|angular|vue|svelte|astro)"
+  - "(site|web|hosting|nextjs|nuxt|react|angular|vue|svelte|astro)"
69-72: “icon” is very broad; prefer avatar-centric terms.

Reduces accidental matches on generic UI icon issues.
-  - "(avatar|initial|flag|icon)"
+  - "(avatar(s)?|initial(s)?|flag(s)?|favicon)"
81-83: Support all self-hosting spellings.
-  - "(self-host|self host)"
+  - "(self[- ]?host(?:ed)?)"
9-12: Optional: tighten “console” scope.

If you see false positives from “browser console” mentions, consider anchoring to “Appwrite Console” explicitly: (appwrite console|console appwrite|console UI). Otherwise current regex is fine.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

💡 Knowledge Base configuration:

MCP integration is disabled by default for public repositories
Jira integration is disabled by default for public repositories
Linear integration is disabled by default for public repositories

You can enable these sources in your CodeRabbit configuration.

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 53a5722 and ba97cfb.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

.github/labeler.yml (1 hunks)
.github/workflows/auto-label-issue.yml (1 hunks)

🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)

.github/workflows/auto-label-issue.yml

⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (17)

GitHub Check: Benchmark
GitHub Check: E2E Service Test (Site Screenshots)
GitHub Check: E2E Service Test (Messaging)
GitHub Check: E2E Service Test (VCS)
GitHub Check: E2E Service Test (Migrations)
GitHub Check: E2E Service Test (Proxy)
GitHub Check: E2E Service Test (Sites)
GitHub Check: E2E Service Test (Webhooks)
GitHub Check: E2E Service Test (GraphQL)
GitHub Check: E2E Service Test (Storage)
GitHub Check: E2E Service Test (Realtime)
GitHub Check: E2E Service Test (Teams)
GitHub Check: E2E Service Test (Databases)
GitHub Check: E2E Service Test (Account)
GitHub Check: E2E Service Test (Functions)
GitHub Check: E2E Service Test (FunctionsSchedule)
GitHub Check: E2E General Test

🔇 Additional comments (1)

.github/labeler.yml (1)

1-84: Overall: good coverage and correct format.

Config structure matches github/issue-labeler expectations; nice descriptive comments. (github.com)

github-actions · 2025-09-03T23:26:56Z

✨ Benchmark results

Requests per second: 1,025
Requests with 200 status code: 184,607
P99 latency: 0.176455472

⚡ Benchmark Comparison

Metric	This PR	Latest version
RPS	1,025	1,001
200	184,607	180,191
P99	0.176455472	0.196568236

stnguyen90 requested a review from Copilot September 3, 2025 23:06

This comment was marked as outdated.

Sign in to view

stnguyen90 force-pushed the chore-github-issue-auto-label branch from 1c87095 to 53a5722 Compare September 3, 2025 23:10

stnguyen90 requested a review from Copilot September 3, 2025 23:10

Copilot AI reviewed Sep 3, 2025

View reviewed changes

stnguyen90 marked this pull request as ready for review September 3, 2025 23:10

chore: create workflow to auto add labels to issues

ba97cfb

stnguyen90 force-pushed the chore-github-issue-auto-label branch from 53a5722 to ba97cfb Compare September 3, 2025 23:14

stnguyen90 requested a review from Copilot September 3, 2025 23:16

Copilot AI reviewed Sep 3, 2025

View reviewed changes

coderabbitai bot reviewed Sep 3, 2025

View reviewed changes

eldadfux approved these changes Sep 4, 2025

View reviewed changes

eldadfux merged commit c02574b into main Sep 4, 2025
40 checks passed

stnguyen90 deleted the chore-github-issue-auto-label branch October 1, 2025 23:58

stnguyen90 restored the chore-github-issue-auto-label branch October 24, 2025 01:51

stnguyen90 deleted the chore-github-issue-auto-label branch October 24, 2025 18:25

stnguyen90 mentioned this pull request Oct 24, 2025

Create workflow to auto add labels to issues #10700

Merged

2 tasks

coderabbitai bot mentioned this pull request Oct 27, 2025

Refactor authorization handling across multiple modules to use the ne… #10682

Merged

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Uh oh!

chore: create workflow to auto add labels to issues #10430

chore: create workflow to auto add labels to issues #10430

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Other AI code review bot(s) detected

Walkthrough

Estimated code review effort

Chat

Support

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR/Issue comments)

Other keywords and placeholders

Status, Documentation and Community

Uh oh!

This comment was marked as outdated.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

chore: create workflow to auto add labels to issues #10430

chore: create workflow to auto add labels to issues #10430

Uh oh!

Conversation

Uh oh!

What does this PR do?

Test Plan

Related PRs and Issues

Checklist

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Other AI code review bot(s) detected

Walkthrough

Estimated code review effort

Chat

Support

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR/Issue comments)

Other keywords and placeholders

Status, Documentation and Community

Uh oh!

This comment was marked as outdated.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Security Scan Results for PR

Docker Image Scan Results

Source Code Scan Results

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull Request Overview

Reviewed Changes

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

✨ Benchmark results

⚡ Benchmark Comparison

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants