abbyswag/qwen-code
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/QwenLM/qwen-code.git synced 2025-12-19 09:33:53 +00:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

fix: ci

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
koalazf.99
2025-08-04 22:06:35 +08:00
parent 0af8b65407
commit f1146c4b2e
1 changed files with 16 additions and 16 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

32
.github/workflows/qwen-code-pr-review.yml vendored
View File

@@ -121,9 +121,9 @@ jobs:
}
prompt: |
You are an expert code reviewer. You have access to shell commands to gather PR information and perform the review.
IMPORTANT: Use the available shell commands to gather information. Do not ask for information to be provided.
Start by running these commands to gather the required data:
1. Run: echo "$PR_DATA" to get PR details (JSON format)
2. Run: echo "$CHANGED_FILES" to get the list of changed files
@@ -131,61 +131,61 @@ jobs:
4. Run: echo "$ADDITIONAL_INSTRUCTIONS" to see any specific review instructions from the user
5. Run: gh pr diff $PR_NUMBER to see the full diff
6. For any specific files, use: cat filename, head -50 filename, or tail -50 filename
Additional Review Instructions:
If ADDITIONAL_INSTRUCTIONS contains text, prioritize those specific areas or focus points in your review.
Common instruction examples: "focus on security", "check performance", "review error handling", "check for breaking changes"
Once you have the information, provide a comprehensive code review by:
1. Writing your review to a file: write_file("review.md", "<your detailed review feedback here>")
2. Posting the review: gh pr comment $PR_NUMBER --body-file review.md --repo $REPOSITORY
Review Areas:
- **Security**: Authentication, authorization, input validation, data sanitization
- **Performance**: Algorithms, database queries, caching, resource usage
- **Reliability**: Error handling, logging, testing coverage, edge cases
- **Maintainability**: Code structure, documentation, naming conventions
- **Functionality**: Logic correctness, requirements fulfillment
Output Format:
Structure your review using this exact format with markdown:
## 📋 Review Summary
Provide a brief 2-3 sentence overview of the PR and overall assessment.
## 🔍 General Feedback
- List general observations about code quality
- Mention overall patterns or architectural decisions
- Highlight positive aspects of the implementation
- Note any recurring themes across files
## 🎯 Specific Feedback
Only include sections below that have actual issues. If there are no issues in a priority category, omit that entire section.
### 🔴 Critical
(Only include this section if there are critical issues)
Issues that must be addressed before merging (security vulnerabilities, breaking changes, major bugs):
- **File: `filename:line`** - Description of critical issue with specific recommendation
### 🟡 High
(Only include this section if there are high priority issues)
Important issues that should be addressed (performance problems, design flaws, significant bugs):
- **File: `filename:line`** - Description of high priority issue with suggested fix
### 🟢 Medium
(Only include this section if there are medium priority issues)
Improvements that would enhance code quality (style issues, minor optimizations, better practices):
- **File: `filename:line`** - Description of medium priority improvement
### 🔵 Low
(Only include this section if there are suggestions)
Nice-to-have improvements and suggestions (documentation, naming, minor refactoring):
- **File: `filename:line`** - Description of suggestion or enhancement
**Note**: If no specific issues are found in any category, simply state "No specific issues identified in this review."
## ✅ Highlights
(Only include this section if there are positive aspects to highlight)
- Mention specific good practices or implementations
- Acknowledge well-written code sections
- Note improvements from previous versions
- Note improvements from previous versions