Add GitPullRequestHelpHandler class by betulependule · Pull Request #2853 · packit/packit-service

betulependule · 2025-10-06T08:36:57Z

A new job handler has been created so that packit-service now has the ability to respond to the help command in PR comments. The bot then should automatically generate a comment, which contains a help message that includes the usage, link to documentation and contacts. A test for Github PR was made to test this new functionality.

TODO:

Update or write new documentation in packit/packit.dev.
In the help message, add reference to /packit-ci when user uses /packit and the other way around. This is in case the user uses /packit when they should be using /packit-ci and vice versa.

Fixes #1668

Related to

Merge after #2850

RELEASE NOTES BEGIN

Packit-service now supports the help command in PR comments.

RELEASE NOTES END

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2025-10-06T08:41:35Z

Build succeeded.
https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/packit-service/buildset/e290e79dc06e4a90b50b767ffe5ade24

✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 57s
✔️ packit-service-tests SUCCESS in 4m 00s

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2025-11-26T10:13:35Z

Build failed.
https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/packit-service/buildset/fcbf4c54690144ecbc74459c2d03192c

❌ pre-commit FAILURE in 1m 43s
❌ packit-service-tests FAILURE in 3m 16s

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2025-11-26T10:19:46Z

Build failed.
https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/packit-service/buildset/0a5eb2726eaa453d8ca04ca29a9e2c64

✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 48s
❌ packit-service-tests FAILURE in 3m 44s

betulependule · 2025-11-26T10:57:17Z

/gemini review

gemini-code-assist

Code Review

This PR introduces a new handler for the help command in PR comments, which is a great addition for user experience. The implementation is straightforward and follows existing patterns in the codebase. The changes are well-contained and include corresponding tests.

I've left a few comments with suggestions for improvement, mainly around code clarity, maintainability, and a potential thread-safety issue in the planned implementation. Once the dependent PR is merged and the commented-out code is enabled, the suggestion regarding thread-safety will be particularly important to address.

Overall, this is a solid contribution.

packit_service/worker/handlers/forges.py

packit_service/worker/jobs.py

packit_service/worker/mixin.py

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2025-11-26T11:53:04Z

Build failed.
https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/packit-service/buildset/a2ec59f70be24ec190d4271826221ea5

✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 48s
❌ packit-service-tests FAILURE in 3m 21s

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2025-11-26T12:05:02Z

Build failed.
https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/packit-service/buildset/b04c8fcfe32f4deeb0d488cfc7c1d7b7

❌ pre-commit FAILURE in 1m 49s
❌ packit-service-tests FAILURE in 3m 19s

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2025-11-26T12:43:10Z

Build succeeded.
https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/packit-service/buildset/5b73e40d72694c5ab127842c4b6818e0

✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 46s
✔️ packit-service-tests SUCCESS in 4m 22s

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2025-11-28T10:03:40Z

Build succeeded.
https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/packit-service/buildset/2052ab8a59b34d5d9253ef585322a7f4

✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 2m 13s
✔️ packit-service-tests SUCCESS in 3m 36s

betulependule · 2025-11-28T10:11:53Z

/gemini review

gemini-code-assist

Code Review

This pull request introduces a new GitPullRequestHelpHandler to respond to /packit help commands in pull request comments. The implementation is well-structured, adding the necessary handler, task, and event routing. The changes also include integration tests for the new functionality on GitHub and Pagure.

My review focuses on improving the robustness of the command detection logic. I've identified a couple of areas where handling of different command prefixes (especially for staging environments) could be improved to prevent issues in the future. One of these is in the active code and could cause bugs in staging, while the other is in commented-out code that is planned for a future update. Addressing these will make the new feature more reliable across all environments.

gemini-code-assist · 2025-11-28T10:13:53Z

packit_service/worker/jobs.py

+        packit_comment_command_prefix = (
+            "/packit-ci" if comment.startswith("/packit-ci") else "/packit"
+        )
+
+        command = get_packit_commands_from_comment(
+            comment,
+            packit_comment_command_prefix,
+        )
+
+        return bool(command and command[0] == PACKIT_HELP_COMMAND)


The logic to detect the help command is not robust enough. It doesn't handle staging prefixes like /packit-stg or /packit-ci-stg, and it can fail if the comment has leading whitespace since comment.startswith is used on the raw comment string.

A better approach would be to iterate through all possible prefixes and use get_packit_commands_from_comment to check for the help command. This would also make the logic more resilient to comment formatting.

Consider improving the test cases in tests/integration/test_pr_comment.py to cover staging prefixes to catch such issues in the future.

Suggested change

packit_comment_command_prefix = (

"/packit-ci" if comment.startswith("/packit-ci") else "/packit"

)

command = get_packit_commands_from_comment(

comment,

packit_comment_command_prefix,

)

return bool(command and command[0] == PACKIT_HELP_COMMAND)

prefixes = ("/packit-ci-stg", "/packit-ci", "/packit-stg", "/packit")

for prefix in prefixes:

command = get_packit_commands_from_comment(

comment,

prefix,

)

if command and command[0] == PACKIT_HELP_COMMAND:

return True

return False

The "-stg" suffixes definitely need to be taken into account. However, I don't think I like the trial and error for loop. I'll try a different solution.

packit_service/worker/handlers/forges.py

betulependule · 2025-11-28T10:52:21Z

/gemini review

gemini-code-assist

Code Review

This pull request introduces a new GitPullRequestHelpHandler to respond to /packit help commands in pull request comments across GitHub, GitLab, and Pagure. This is a valuable feature for improving user experience. The implementation is well-structured, adding a new handler, a Celery task, and updating the job processing logic. Integration tests for GitHub and Pagure are included. My review focuses on a minor typo, improving test coverage by adding a GitLab test, and correcting type hints for better code quality.

packit_service/worker/jobs.py

packit_service/worker/tasks.py

tests/integration/test_pr_comment.py

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2025-11-28T10:54:54Z

Build succeeded.
https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/packit-service/buildset/c032e01aa4f14eefa491a43d23f0bcb0

✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 46s
✔️ packit-service-tests SUCCESS in 3m 47s

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2025-11-28T11:03:33Z

Build succeeded.
https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/packit-service/buildset/5cd9379bfffd48979c8d1a5525924b46

✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 41s
✔️ packit-service-tests SUCCESS in 3m 27s

centosinfra-prod-github-app · 2026-01-27T10:32:32Z

Build succeeded.
https://gateway-cloud-softwarefactory.apps.ocp.cloud.ci.centos.org/zuul/t/packit-service/buildset/ff1bcd51fe2447c1b178a355863a084a

✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 50s
✔️ packit-service-tests SUCCESS in 3m 29s

centosinfra-prod-github-app · 2026-01-27T11:52:16Z

Build succeeded.
https://gateway-cloud-softwarefactory.apps.ocp.cloud.ci.centos.org/zuul/t/packit-service/buildset/d8943a4d96d74e98b4bf1353e0fa6a0f

✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 48s
✔️ packit-service-tests SUCCESS in 3m 24s

betulependule · 2026-01-28T09:54:38Z

I'm thinking whether it wouldn't be better to remove the get_pr_comment_parser and get_pr_comment_parser_fedora_ci functions and instead, implement two singleton classes PRCommentParser and PRCommentParserFedoraCI and move them from utils.py to a dedicated file.

Edit: Something like this would be more relevant to this issue, which is directly about making changes to the process of parsing comments. I've left the suggestion there.

centosinfra-prod-github-app · 2026-01-28T09:54:43Z

Build succeeded.
https://gateway-cloud-softwarefactory.apps.ocp.cloud.ci.centos.org/zuul/t/packit-service/buildset/7cf850056e534965bff941951852247e

✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 44s
✔️ packit-service-tests SUCCESS in 3m 24s

centosinfra-prod-github-app · 2026-01-29T11:37:28Z

Build succeeded.
https://gateway-cloud-softwarefactory.apps.ocp.cloud.ci.centos.org/zuul/t/packit-service/buildset/1dcfe5327abe452ba2aea3f978650dcd

✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 45s
✔️ packit-service-tests SUCCESS in 3m 25s

tests/integration/test_pr_comment.py

packit_service/worker/jobs.py

majamassarini

I like the idea of a new Handler for reacting to the help comments! I've just left a couple of suggestions.

packit_service/constants.py

tests/integration/test_pr_comment.py

packit_service/worker/handlers/forges.py

packit_service/worker/jobs.py

majamassarini · 2026-02-03T11:22:50Z

I'm thinking whether it wouldn't be better to remove the get_pr_comment_parser and get_pr_comment_parser_fedora_ci functions and instead, implement two singleton classes PRCommentParser and PRCommentParserFedoraCI and move them from utils.py to a dedicated file.

I don't think you need a "real singleton", but if I follow you, then yes. Injecting the proper class and relying on it instead of checking which method we need to call can be a better solution.

majamassarini · 2026-02-03T11:24:42Z

And sorry for commenting twice, I tried to wrote the comments from inside cursor, and they showed up after a while... I thought I had lost them 😅

lbarcziova

overall looks neat!

packit_service/worker/handlers/forges.py

The previously used variable seemed to always be initialized with the "/packit" value, which would result in incorrect behaviour in Fedora CI as the expected value in this case would be "/packit-ci" instead. Correct value should now be in use.

There is now a reference to /packit-ci when user uses /packit and the other way around. This is in case the user uses /packit when they should be using /packit-ci and vice versa.

This is done so that tests can be run successfully outside of containers.

`GitPullRequestHelpHandler` now reacts to issue comments as well.

The help message referencing `/packit help` has been reworded to sound better. Co-authored-by: Maja Massarini <2678400+majamassarini@users.noreply.github.com>

The code should now be clear that comments starting with "/packit-ci-stg" and "/packit-ci" lead to the use of the same Fedora CI comment parser. Co-authored-by: Maja Massarini <2678400+majamassarini@users.noreply.github.com>

Removed this inheritance due to the fact that none of PackitAPIWithDownstreamMixin's functionality is needed. Empty implementations of `clean_api` and `packit_api` have been added to avoid TypeError when instantiating `GitPullRequestHelpHandler`.

The staging instance now uses the "/packit-stg" keyword in the help message, the production instance uses "/packit". Equivalent changes have been done when it comes to Fedora CI help messages.

When parsing comments outside of the `GitPullRequestHelpHandler`, the help message parameters are unnecessary (they are only needed when generating the help message). As such, comments parsers are now instantiated without them. The values of these parameters now have the default value `None`.

centosinfra-prod-github-app · 2026-02-04T11:43:14Z

Build succeeded.
https://gateway-cloud-softwarefactory.apps.ocp.cloud.ci.centos.org/zuul/t/packit-service/buildset/d1bec126d31f4e71958c3a3c15371b72

✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 48s
✔️ packit-service-tests SUCCESS in 3m 24s

betulependule force-pushed the help-pr-comment-command branch from 457d872 to 7cb22ab Compare November 26, 2025 10:09

gemini-code-assist bot reviewed Nov 26, 2025

View reviewed changes

betulependule force-pushed the help-pr-comment-command branch from 6e25b11 to efb691b Compare November 26, 2025 12:37

betulependule mentioned this pull request Nov 27, 2025

Add help commands to documentation packit/packit.dev#1075

Open

gemini-code-assist bot reviewed Nov 28, 2025

View reviewed changes

betulependule force-pushed the help-pr-comment-command branch from 1df9cdb to a4ae68a Compare November 28, 2025 10:50

gemini-code-assist bot reviewed Nov 28, 2025

View reviewed changes

packit_service/worker/jobs.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

packit_service/worker/jobs.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

packit_service/worker/tasks.py Show resolved Hide resolved

tests/integration/test_pr_comment.py Show resolved Hide resolved

betulependule force-pushed the help-pr-comment-command branch from 3ca3c90 to 499c4f2 Compare January 27, 2026 10:28

betulependule force-pushed the help-pr-comment-command branch from 76f128d to 5636422 Compare January 27, 2026 11:48

betulependule force-pushed the help-pr-comment-command branch 2 times, most recently from d9b68d5 to f40ae8a Compare January 28, 2026 09:50

betulependule marked this pull request as ready for review January 28, 2026 09:54

betulependule requested a review from mfocko as a code owner January 28, 2026 09:54

betulependule requested a review from nforro as a code owner January 28, 2026 09:54

betulependule requested a review from a team as a code owner January 28, 2026 09:54

betulependule force-pushed the help-pr-comment-command branch from f40ae8a to f8b6edc Compare January 29, 2026 09:54

usercont-release-bot added this to Packit pull requests Jan 29, 2026

github-project-automation bot moved this to New in Packit pull requests Jan 29, 2026

majamassarini reviewed Feb 3, 2026

View reviewed changes

tests/integration/test_pr_comment.py Show resolved Hide resolved

majamassarini reviewed Feb 3, 2026

View reviewed changes

packit_service/worker/jobs.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

majamassarini reviewed Feb 3, 2026

View reviewed changes

lbarcziova reviewed Feb 3, 2026

View reviewed changes

packit_service/worker/handlers/forges.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

packit_service/worker/handlers/forges.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

lbarcziova moved this from New to In review in Packit pull requests Feb 3, 2026

betulependule force-pushed the help-pr-comment-command branch from 14434d3 to 91b0c02 Compare February 4, 2026 09:57

betulependule and others added 11 commits February 4, 2026 11:40

Add GitPullRequestHelpHandler class

7ab7d9c

Take prefixes related to staging instances to consideration

2ccc87c

Add a reference to alternate command

fef4c0e

There is now a reference to /packit-ci when user uses /packit and the other way around. This is in case the user uses /packit when they should be using /packit-ci and vice versa.

Add Pushgateway mock to tests

6a3d57c

This is done so that tests can be run successfully outside of containers.

React to issue comments as well as PR comments

5d397de

`GitPullRequestHelpHandler` now reacts to issue comments as well.

Reword help note message

1ee38c9

The help message referencing `/packit help` has been reworded to sound better. Co-authored-by: Maja Massarini <2678400+majamassarini@users.noreply.github.com>

Consider stg instance comment schema explicitly

4db0f0f

The code should now be clear that comments starting with "/packit-ci-stg" and "/packit-ci" lead to the use of the same Fedora CI comment parser. Co-authored-by: Maja Massarini <2678400+majamassarini@users.noreply.github.com>

Let stg and prod instances have different help message

6e65608

The staging instance now uses the "/packit-stg" keyword in the help message, the production instance uses "/packit". Equivalent changes have been done when it comes to Fedora CI help messages.

betulependule force-pushed the help-pr-comment-command branch from b923b5e to fc037f1 Compare February 4, 2026 10:41

Conversation

betulependule commented Oct 6, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented Oct 6, 2025

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented Nov 26, 2025

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented Nov 26, 2025

Uh oh!

betulependule commented Nov 26, 2025

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Code Review

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented Nov 26, 2025

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented Nov 26, 2025

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented Nov 26, 2025

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented Nov 28, 2025

Uh oh!

betulependule commented Nov 28, 2025

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Code Review

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist bot Nov 28, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

betulependule Nov 28, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

betulependule commented Nov 28, 2025

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Code Review

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented Nov 28, 2025

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented Nov 28, 2025

Uh oh!

centosinfra-prod-github-app bot commented Jan 27, 2026

Uh oh!

centosinfra-prod-github-app bot commented Jan 27, 2026

Uh oh!

betulependule commented Jan 28, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

centosinfra-prod-github-app bot commented Jan 28, 2026

Uh oh!

centosinfra-prod-github-app bot commented Jan 29, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

majamassarini left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

majamassarini commented Feb 3, 2026

Uh oh!

betulependule commented Oct 6, 2025 •

edited

Loading

betulependule commented Jan 28, 2026 •

edited

Loading