Automatically trigger the sync-ref workflow runs on pushes to git/git

[dscho]

The gitgitgadget-git GitHub App is set up to deliver push webhook events. We might just as well put those events to good use by triggering the GitHub workflow whose responsibility it is to synchronize the git/git branches to gitgitgadget/git.

[dscho]

I manually triggered this by copying the payload of a push event from the "Advanced" tab of the gitgitgadget-git App and then launching this node.js script:

#!/usr/bin/env node

(async () => {
    const fs = require('fs')

    // Expect a path as command-line parameter that points to a file containing
    // an event copy/pasted from
    // https://github.com/organizations/gitgitgadget/settings/apps/gitgitgadget-git/advanced
    // in the form:
    //
    // Headers
    //
    // Request method: POST
    // [...]
    //
    // Payload
    //
    // {
    //    [...]
    // }

    const path = process.argv[2]
    const contents = fs.readFileSync(path).toString('utf-8')

    const req = {
        headers: {}
    }

    const payloadOffset = contents.indexOf('\n{')
    if (payloadOffset < 0) throw new Error(`Could not find start of payload in ${path}`)
    contents.substring(0, payloadOffset).split(/\r?\n/).forEach(line => {
        const colon = line.indexOf(':')
        if (colon < 0) return

        const key = line.substring(0, colon).toLowerCase()
        const value = line.substring(colon + 1).replace(/^\s+/, '')

        if (key === 'request method') req.method = value
        else req.headers[key] = value
    })
    req.rawBody = contents.substring(payloadOffset + 1)
        // In https://github.com/organizations/gitgitgadget/settings/apps/gitgitgadget-git/advanced,
        // the JSON is pretty-printed, but the actual webhook event avoids any
        // unnecessary white-space in the body
        .replace(/\r?\n\s*("[^"]*":)\s*/g, '$1')
        .replace(/\r?\n\s*/g, '')
    req.body = JSON.parse(req.rawBody)

    const context = {
        log: console.log,
        done: () => {},
        req,
    }

    const localSettings = JSON.parse(fs.readFileSync('local.settings.json'))
    Object.entries(localSettings.Values).forEach(([key, value]) => process.env[key] = value)

    const index = require('./GitGitGadget/index')
    console.log(await index(context, req) || context.res)
})().catch(console.log)

[dscho]

@webstech do you think you'll get a chance to look over this PR?

[webstech]

In trigger-workflow-dispatch.js, are token, and actor expected to be populated outside of testing?

[webstech]

Any reason token has moved to a different position vs triggerWorkflowDispatch?

Did not expect this to stop the merge ☹️.

[dscho]

I guess it's only historical reasons. I fixed it.

[dscho]

In trigger-workflow-dispatch.js, are token, and actor expected to be populated outside of testing?

Yes. The idea is to let the GitHub App generate an installation access token, and use that (and then to figure out the actor that was recorded for the workflow that was triggered using this token).

[webstech]

In trigger-workflow-dispatch.js, are token, and actor expected to be populated outside of testing?

Yes. The idea is to let the GitHub App generate an installation access token, and use that (and then to figure out the actor that was recorded for the workflow that was triggered using this token).

Sorry, I did not properly say what I was thinking. token is passed as a parameter to triggerWorkflowDispatch but is only valued in tests. actor is passed as a parameter to waitForWorkflowRun but is never actually valued. In tests, it is set by mocking.

• should token be a parameter on the trigger function or should the calls be mocked in testing (to allow fuller testing of the code path)? Mocking would be more consistent with setting actor in tests. The app this is based on uses mocking.
• should actor be a parameter on the wait function or just a local variable?

[dscho]

@webstech it is true that the functions are more generic than they are used here, which is for the reason that they hail from a different project (where I tried to make them generic enough to be able to test locally, using my own token).

So while it is not strictly necessary for the functions to be so generic (and the token and actor parameters could be eliminated), in the interest to make it easier to port improvements back and forth to/from that other project, I would like to keep the functions as-are.

[webstech]

All set for you to merge - I don't appear to have access.

[dscho]

All set for you to merge - I don't appear to have access.

Sorry, my oversight. I fixed it (in all repositories in this org).