Update README.md

[Keyrxng]

Resolves https://www.github.com/ubiquity-os/plugins-wishlist/issues/45

[ubqbot]

Based on the provided diff and the specification, here are the observations:

1. Pull Request Flow: The diff does not explicitly show any mechanism for the bot to automatically check the pull request against the issue specification when it is moved from draft to finalized by the author. The implementation should include logic to trigger this check when a pull request is finalized.

2. Actionable Feedback: There is no evidence in the diff that the bot provides actionable feedback highlighting any missing elements from the specification. The implementation should include a feature to analyze the pull request against the issue specification and provide detailed feedback.

3. Reverting to Draft: The diff does not show any functionality to revert the pull request back to draft status if it does not meet the specification. This feature needs to be implemented to ensure that the pull request process is followed correctly.

4. Collaborator Intervention: The diff does not include logic to cease intervention when a collaborator changes the pull from draft to finalized. This is an important part of the specification that needs to be addressed.

5. CI Passing Check: Although not required in the primary specification, there is no mention of ensuring CI is passing, which was noted as a bonus task.

6. Review Limits: There is no implementation of limiting the reviews to one per day for ChatGPT, which was mentioned as a bonus task to prevent abuse of the review feature.

To meet the specification, the implementation should include these missing elements.

[ubqbot]

Based on the provided diff and the specification, the following points are missing or need clarification:

1. Automated Pull Request Checks:

   • The code should include logic to automatically check if a pull request meets the issue specifications when it is finalized from a draft. This involves consuming the issue specification and the pull diff into its context and returning actionable feedback.

2. Draft State Reversion:

   • If the pull request does not meet the specifications, the bot should request changes and convert the pull back into a draft state. The current code does not show any implementation for converting a pull request back to a draft.

3. State Change Communication:

   • The bot should clearly communicate the reasons for draft state reversion as actionable feedback. This communication mechanism is not evident in the current code.

4. Event Handling for Pull Requests:

   • The code should handle events specifically for pull_request.opened and pull_request.ready_for_review by the original author. The performPullPrecheck function is defined but not implemented, which should handle these events.

5. Collaborator Intervention:

   • The bot should not intervene if a collaborator finalizes the pull request instead of the original author. There is no logic in the current code to differentiate between actions taken by the original author and collaborators.

6. API Version Fallback:

   • The specification mentions using o1 primarily, but if unavailable, fallback to 4o or 3.5 sonnet. The current code does not show any implementation related to API version fallback.

7. Limiting Reviews:

   • The specification suggests limiting reviews to one per day for ChatGPT to prevent abuse. There is no implementation for this limitation in the current code.

These points need to be addressed to fully meet the specification requirements.

[ubqbot]

Upon reviewing the pull request against the provided specification, here are the observations:

1. Draft to Finalized Transition: The pull request should be initially opened as a draft and then converted to a finalized pull request by the contributor when ready for review. Ensure this process is followed.

2. Specification Compliance:

   • The changes in the code seem to align with the specification of adding functionality for handling pull request events (pull_request.opened, pull_request.ready_for_review) and implementing a callback proxy system.
   • The addition of issueCommentCreatedCallback and proxyCallbacks aligns with the requirement to handle specific events and manage callbacks.
   • The manifest.json update to include new listeners (pull_request.opened, pull_request.ready_for_review) is consistent with the specification.

3. Missing Elements:

   • There is no explicit check or feedback mechanism implemented to revert the pull request to draft if it does not meet the specification. The specification requires that if criteria are not met, the pull should revert to draft with the review state set as 'requested changes'.
   • The logic for limiting reviews to one per day for ChatGPT, as mentioned in the bonus section, is not implemented.

4. CI Checks: Although not prioritized, ensure that CI checks are passing to avoid any potential issues.

5. Bot Behavior: Ensure that the bot's intervention ceases if a collaborator converts a draft pull into a finalized pull, as specified.

Overall, the core functionality seems to be implemented, but additional logic for reverting to draft and limiting review requests is missing. Please address these points to fully meet the specification.