Follow-up from "WIP: Initial Commit on 48640"
The following discussions from !20771 (closed) should be addressed:
-
@smcgivern started a discussion: (+1 comment) Should this be 'returns to previous assignee', instead?
-
@smcgivern started a discussion: I think we could just check if this is a merge request, as those don't support multiple assignees.
Yes, this does work.
-
@smcgivern started a discussion: (+1 comment) If I had more time, I would have found a way to allow the Interpret Service to send a parameter, without it being present in the comment. This would have allowed the intended use case "/pong" to be possible.
Does this mean that
/assign assigner
works, but you need to type/pong @smcgivern
?
This now works with "/pong" alone.
-
@smcgivern started a discussion: (+1 comment) - Could we break this over multiple lines, please?
- What if the user assigned this to themselves?
- Should we restrict this to system notes, with the
system
scope? (Otherwise I could add a comment of 'assigned to @oswaldo' and this would find that.) - What if there is no matching note?
If there is no matching note, the block will return nil, but will not be parsed, due to the ||= operator used to retrieve the value. I amended the issuable to use the system scope. Self assignation is irrelevant to the feature, because the previous assignee is by definition, not yourself (author_id != current_user.id).
-
@smcgivern started a discussion: QuickAction -> quick action
issuables -> issues and merge requests? (As this is user facing.)
-
@smcgivern started a discussion: Is this meant to be
not_to
?🤔
Correct, it was meant to be "not_to".
-
@smcgivern started a discussion: Should we add this to https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/user/project/quick_actions.html?
-
@oswaldo started a discussion: contains /pong
? -
@oswaldo started a discussion: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/merge_requests/20771#note_89972788