Badge request: GitHub merged pull requests #6164

AraHaan · 2021-02-12T01:50:21Z

📋 Description

I would like a badge that counts all of the pull requests that was merged only, the closed pr badge could be changed I think to filter out merged prs.

The badge is for GitHub.
What sort of information should this badge show?
The badge should contain the count of merged pull requests, also the count of merged pull requests could also be used to subtract from the closed pull request badge to (or well make a version of it that excludes merged prs).

🔗

Where can we get the data from?
list the pull requests first using GET https://api.github.com/repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls then request:
GET https://api.github.com/repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{pull_number}/merge

Is there a public API?
yes
Does the API requires an API key?
Nope.
Link to the API documentation.
https://docs.github.com/en/rest/reference/pulls#list-pull-requests
https://docs.github.com/en/rest/reference/pulls#check-if-a-pull-request-has-been-merged

🎤 Motivation

I noticed that we could show up opened, closed issues and pull requests among other things however lacked the ability to get a badge for merged pull requests.

What is the specific use case?
People like me want to show that we merge pull requests a ton and it would support those who feel like contributing to projects too.

The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:

AraHaan · 2021-02-12T01:59:40Z

It seems there is another way as well to -> https://github.com/Elskom/Sdk/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aclosed+is%3Aunmerged
returns only unmerged pr's while -> https://github.com/Elskom/Sdk/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aclosed+is%3Amerged
returns only merged.

calebcartwright · 2021-02-12T02:02:40Z

Thanks! I think that the API information is not correct for what you're asking for though, or at least not a viable option.

We actually already support distinguishing between merged vs. closed for individual PRs

#6159
https://img.shields.io/github/pulls/detail/state/badges/shields/6159

#6161
https://img.shields.io/github/pulls/detail/state/badges/shields/6161

The difference here is the desire to filter against the total PR count for merged vs. closed, and this is actually much simpler to do via the v4/GraphQL API. Fortunately, our existing badge that reports total for both issues and PRs already does this!

shields/services/github/github-issues.service.js

Lines 332 to 349 in d4116b3

    
                     query( 
        
                       $user: String! 
        
                       $repo: String! 
        
                       $states: [PullRequestState!] 
        
                       $labels: [String!] 
        
                     ) { 
        
                       repository(owner: $user, name: $repo) { 
        
                         pullRequests(states: $states, labels: $labels) { 
        
                           totalCount 
        
                         } 
        
                       } 
        
                     } 
        
                   `, 
        
                   variables: { 
        
                     ...commonVariables, 
        
                     states: isClosed ? ['MERGED', 'CLOSED'] : ['OPEN'], 
        
                   }, 
        
                   schema: pullRequestCountSchema,

Think all that would be needed to make this happen is an additional route variant (issues-pr-merged, for consistency)

shields/services/github/github-issues.service.js

Lines 42 to 46 in d4116b3

    
           static route = { 
        
             base: 'github', 
        
             pattern: 
        
               ':variant(issues|issues-closed|issues-pr|issues-pr-closed):raw(-raw)?/:user/:repo/:label*', 
        
           }

and then tweaking the respective signatures to support passing through the merged-only option, and using the state filters accordingly:

shields/services/github/github-issues.service.js

Lines 345 to 348 in d4116b3

    
           variables: { 
        
             ...commonVariables, 
        
             states: isClosed ? ['MERGED', 'CLOSED'] : ['OPEN'], 
        
           },

closed = merged+closed states
merged = merged state
otherwise open state

AraHaan · 2021-02-12T02:15:10Z

@calebcartwright can we also have an issues-pr-closed-unmerged too eventually?

calebcartwright · 2021-02-12T02:16:14Z

issues-pr-closed-unmerged too eventually?

would probably need to bikeshed on the name a bit, but i don't see why not!

chris48s · 2021-02-13T14:07:31Z

It seems there is another way as well to -> https://github.com/Elskom/Sdk/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aclosed+is%3Aunmerged
returns only unmerged pr's while -> https://github.com/Elskom/Sdk/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aclosed+is%3Amerged
returns only merged.

You can use these queries with the custom issue search badge e.g:

- https://img.shields.io/github/issues-search/Elskom/Sdk?label=unmerged%20PRs&query=is%3Apr%20is%3Aclosed%20is%3Aunmerged

- https://img.shields.io/github/issues-search/Elskom/Sdk?label=merged%20PRs&query=is%3Apr+is%3Aclosed+is%3Amerged

calebcartwright · 2021-02-13T17:06:58Z

Good point Chris. Do you think we should go ahead and close this (folks can always use the color query param if they want it to have the same purple color) or would it be worthwhile to make those options available like the other PR aggregate status badges?

AraHaan · 2021-02-13T17:10:41Z

I would like the options available like the other pr aggregate badges.

Also @chris48s it does not say merged or unmerged at the end either.

AraHaan · 2021-02-13T17:23:18Z

https://github.com/badges/shields/blob/master/services/github/github-issues-search.service.js#L26-L28

I see from here it does not let you set text at the end, perhaps have an optional query param for it that defaults to nothing?.

calebcartwright · 2021-02-13T17:29:01Z

I see from here it does not let you set text at the end, perhaps have an optional query param for it that defaults to nothing?.

No, this is by design. We do not allow open ended badge message customization #6135. For the issues status badges, we have two kinds, one that puts the status in the label (raw) and another that puts it as a suffix in the message:

https://img.shields.io/github/issues-pr-raw/badges/shields

https://img.shields.io/github/issues-pr/badges/shields

the former is already possible via the issue search badge and query params as noted above, the latter would not be.

i'm not personally opposed to to including the additional PR status variants, but it does seem like quite a bit of overhead just to get the non-raw versions (status on the message)

jaas666 · 2022-05-12T20:12:31Z

This issue seems like it was solved.
Can I suggest closing it?

calebcartwright · 2022-05-12T20:54:17Z

This issue seems like it was solved. Can I suggest closing it?

Thanks for the question! However, no, I don't see this as resolved.

It's often the case that there's a viable alternative/workaround available via existing features such as our dynamic badge features (or custom endpoint), but that doesn't inherently negate/resolve the request for a native badge.

This issue was requesting a native badge that doesn't yet exist (though which has some alternative as noted earlier in the thread). From the maintainer side we've not explicitly said "no we won't do this", and the author hasn't changed their mind yet either and closed the issue themselves.

I don't anticipate the issue being closed unless and until one of those two things happen, or unless someone implements the requested badge.

jaas666 · 2022-05-12T21:12:18Z

Noted 👍

…

On Thu, May 12, 2022, 3:54 PM Caleb Cartwright ***@***.***> wrote: This issue seems like it was solved. Can I suggest closing it? Thanks for the question! However, no, I don't see this as resolved. It's often the case that there's a viable alternative/workaround available via existing features such as our dynamic badge features (or custom endpoint), but that doesn't inherently negate/resolve the request for a native badge. This issue was requesting a native badge that doesn't yet exist (though which has some alternative as noted earlier in the thread). From the maintainer side we've not explicitly said "no we won't do this", and the author hasn't changed their mind yet either and closed the issue themselves. I don't anticipate the issue being closed unless and until one of those two things happen, or unless someone implements the requested badge. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#6164 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AHGOB42EXUKQ2IKRXFMWJ33VJVVYRANCNFSM4XP4JFUA> . You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>

PaulaBarszcz · 2022-12-10T22:07:18Z

I would like to work on this one :)

Hronom · 2023-05-19T14:18:25Z

Please someone work on this

AraHaan added the service-badge Accepted and actionable changes, features, and bugs label Feb 12, 2021

AraHaan mentioned this issue Feb 12, 2021

Github: Support PR/issues with labels, full count #1020

Closed

paulmelnikow changed the title ~~Badge for merged pull requests.~~ Badge request: GitHub merged pull requests Jul 9, 2021

PaulaBarszcz mentioned this issue Dec 10, 2022

Add issues-pr-merged and issues-pr-closed-unmerged to [GitHubIssues] #8708

Closed

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Badge request: GitHub merged pull requests #6164

Badge request: GitHub merged pull requests #6164

AraHaan commented Feb 12, 2021 •

edited

AraHaan commented Feb 12, 2021

calebcartwright commented Feb 12, 2021

AraHaan commented Feb 12, 2021 •

edited

calebcartwright commented Feb 12, 2021

chris48s commented Feb 13, 2021

calebcartwright commented Feb 13, 2021

AraHaan commented Feb 13, 2021 •

edited

AraHaan commented Feb 13, 2021 •

edited

calebcartwright commented Feb 13, 2021

jaas666 commented May 12, 2022

calebcartwright commented May 12, 2022

jaas666 commented May 12, 2022 via email

PaulaBarszcz commented Dec 10, 2022

Hronom commented May 19, 2023

Badge request: GitHub merged pull requests #6164

Badge request: GitHub merged pull requests #6164

Comments

AraHaan commented Feb 12, 2021 • edited

AraHaan commented Feb 12, 2021

calebcartwright commented Feb 12, 2021

AraHaan commented Feb 12, 2021 • edited

calebcartwright commented Feb 12, 2021

chris48s commented Feb 13, 2021

calebcartwright commented Feb 13, 2021

AraHaan commented Feb 13, 2021 • edited

AraHaan commented Feb 13, 2021 • edited

calebcartwright commented Feb 13, 2021

jaas666 commented May 12, 2022

calebcartwright commented May 12, 2022

jaas666 commented May 12, 2022 via email

PaulaBarszcz commented Dec 10, 2022

Hronom commented May 19, 2023

AraHaan commented Feb 12, 2021 •

edited

AraHaan commented Feb 12, 2021 •

edited

AraHaan commented Feb 13, 2021 •

edited

AraHaan commented Feb 13, 2021 •

edited