✨ add insights. #155
Merged
✨ add insights. #155
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Signed-off-by: Jeff Ortel <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Ortel <[email protected]>
jortel
added a commit
to konveyor/tackle2-hub
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 8, 2025
Add support for insights. With the addition of insights, the term _issue_ is no longer appropriate for the base level thing reported by a rule. Rather, rules report insights about the code. Some insights (with effort) report issues to be resolved. The analysis report will rename issue to: insight. Query & filtering: - insights that are NOT issues: `?filter=effort=0` - insights that ARE issues: `?filter=effort>0` Consider this with an analogy of: Fruit (=insight) and Apple (=issue/violation). I would be odd and backwards to consider fruit as: apples with (without) some specific characteristic. Definition: Insight: - _an instance of apprehending the true nature of a thing, especially through intuitive understanding_. - _the capacity to gain an accurate and deep understanding of a person or thing_. Related: - addon: konveyor/tackle2-addon-analyzer#155 - UI: _TBD_ <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit * **Refactor** * All references to "issues" have been renamed to "insights" across the user interface, API endpoints, documentation, and data exports. * API routes, responses, and related terminology now consistently use "insight" instead of "issue". * Database migration and models have been updated to reflect the new naming. * Documentation and script outputs now reference "insights" for improved clarity and consistency. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> --------- Signed-off-by: Jeff Ortel <[email protected]>
WalkthroughThe changes refactor the codebase to shift terminology and data structures from "issues" to "insights." All related types, methods, fields, and file outputs are renamed accordingly. Output structures are enhanced with more detailed information for each insight. The Go module dependency version is updated without adding a replace directive. Changes
Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant User
participant Analyzer
participant Builder (Insights)
participant Manifest
User->>Analyzer: Run()
Analyzer->>Builder (Insights): NewInsights(output)
Builder (Insights)-->>Analyzer: *Insights
Analyzer-->>User: *Insights, *Deps, error
User->>Manifest: Manifest{Insights: insights, ...}
Manifest->>Manifest: Write()
Manifest->>Builder (Insights): Insights.Write(file)
Builder (Insights)-->>Manifest: Write insights data
Poem
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI ⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (1)
🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
SupportNeed help? Create a ticket on our support page for assistance with any issues or questions. Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🔭 Outside diff range comments (1)
builder/issue.go (1)
44-128: Refactor to eliminate code duplication.The code for processing Violations (lines 50-89) and Insights (lines 90-123) is nearly identical. Consider extracting a helper function to reduce duplication.
Apply this refactor to eliminate duplication:
+// processIncidents converts incidents to API incidents +func (b *Insights) processIncidents(incidents []output.Incident) []api.Incident { + result := []api.Incident{} + for _, i := range incidents { + incident := api.Incident{ + File: b.fileRef(i.URI), + Line: pointer.IntDeref(i.LineNumber, 0), + Message: i.Message, + CodeSnip: i.CodeSnip, + Facts: i.Variables, + } + result = append(result, incident) + } + return result +} + +// processLinks converts links to API links +func (b *Insights) processLinks(links []output.Link) []api.Link { + result := []api.Link{} + for _, l := range links { + result = append(result, api.Link{ + URL: l.URL, + Title: l.Title, + }) + } + return result +} // Write insights section. func (b *Insights) Write(writer io.Writer) (err error) { encoder := yaml.NewEncoder(writer) _, _ = writer.Write([]byte(api.BeginInsightsMarker)) _, _ = writer.Write([]byte{'\n'}) for _, ruleset := range b.input { for ruleid, v := range ruleset.Violations { insight := api.Insight{ RuleSet: ruleset.Name, Rule: ruleid, Description: v.Description, Labels: v.Labels, } if v.Category != nil { insight.Category = string(*v.Category) } if v.Effort != nil { insight.Effort = *v.Effort } - insight.Links = []api.Link{} - for _, l := range v.Links { - insight.Links = append( - insight.Links, - api.Link{ - URL: l.URL, - Title: l.Title, - }) - } - insight.Incidents = []api.Incident{} - for _, i := range v.Incidents { - incident := api.Incident{ - File: b.fileRef(i.URI), - Line: pointer.IntDeref(i.LineNumber, 0), - Message: i.Message, - CodeSnip: i.CodeSnip, - Facts: i.Variables, - } - insight.Incidents = append( - insight.Incidents, - incident) - } + insight.Links = b.processLinks(v.Links) + insight.Incidents = b.processIncidents(v.Incidents) err = encoder.Encode(&insight) if err != nil { return } } for ruleid, v := range ruleset.Insights { insight := api.Insight{ RuleSet: ruleset.Name, Rule: ruleid, Description: v.Description, Labels: v.Labels, } - insight.Links = []api.Link{} - for _, l := range v.Links { - insight.Links = append( - insight.Links, - api.Link{ - URL: l.URL, - Title: l.Title, - }) - } - insight.Incidents = []api.Incident{} - for _, i := range v.Incidents { - incident := api.Incident{ - File: b.fileRef(i.URI), - Line: pointer.IntDeref(i.LineNumber, 0), - Message: i.Message, - CodeSnip: i.CodeSnip, - Facts: i.Variables, - } - insight.Incidents = append( - insight.Incidents, - incident) - } + insight.Links = b.processLinks(v.Links) + insight.Incidents = b.processIncidents(v.Incidents) err = encoder.Encode(&insight) if err != nil { return } } } _, _ = writer.Write([]byte(api.EndInsightsMarker)) _, _ = writer.Write([]byte{'\n'}) return }
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
builder/issue.go (1)
1-1: Consider renaming the file to match the new terminology.Since all types and functions have been renamed from "Issues" to "Insights", the file should be renamed from
issue.gotoinsights.gofor consistency.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
go.sumis excluded by!**/*.sum
📒 Files selected for processing (5)
builder/issue.go(4 hunks)builder/manifest.go(2 hunks)cmd/analyzer.go(2 hunks)cmd/main.go(4 hunks)go.mod(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🧬 Code Graph Analysis (4)
builder/manifest.go (1)
builder/issue.go (1)
Insights(30-34)
cmd/analyzer.go (3)
builder/issue.go (2)
Insights(30-34)NewInsights(23-27)builder/deps.go (1)
Deps(20-22)cmd/main.go (1)
Dir(23-23)
cmd/main.go (3)
builder/issue.go (2)
RuleError(169-171)Insights(30-34)builder/deps.go (1)
Deps(20-22)cmd/tagger.go (1)
Tagger(13-16)
builder/issue.go (1)
cmd/rules.go (1)
Labels(331-334)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (1)
- GitHub Check: build-and-upload-for-global-ci
🔇 Additional comments (4)
builder/manifest.go (1)
13-13: LGTM!The field renaming from
IssuestoInsightsand corresponding method call update are consistent with the broader refactoring across the codebase.Also applies to: 37-37
cmd/analyzer.go (1)
28-29: Changes look good - note the output file name change.The updates to use
Insightsinstead ofIssuesare consistent. Note that the output file name has changed fromissues.yamltoinsights.yaml, which may impact downstream consumers.Also applies to: 59-59
cmd/main.go (1)
111-111: LGTM!All references to
issueshave been consistently updated toinsightsthroughout the file, including variable names, function parameters, and method calls.Also applies to: 117-117, 121-121, 134-134, 141-141, 153-153, 176-176
builder/issue.go (1)
22-27: Good enhancement to include detailed incident information.The expansion of the output structure to include Links and detailed Incidents (with file references, line numbers, messages, code snippets, and facts) provides much richer reporting capabilities.
Also applies to: 29-34, 44-128
Signed-off-by: Jeff Ortel <[email protected]>
dymurray
approved these changes
Jul 8, 2025
This was referenced Jul 16, 2025
This was referenced Aug 22, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Report insights.
Requires: konveyor/tackle2-hub#841
Summary by CodeRabbit