Standardised all cases to have the same case (#86)

Standardised all cases to have the same case.

Renamed all cases of `min_approvals` to `minApprovals`

README.md

@@ -230,7 +230,7 @@ rules:
       exclude:
         - '.github/'
     type: basic
-    min_approvals: 2
+    minApprovals: 2
     teams:
       - team-1
       - team-2
@@ -251,7 +251,7 @@ It has the same parameters as a normal rule:
 	- **exclude**: An array of regular expressions pointing to the files that this rule should ignore when deciding if it should evaluate the Pull Request.
 		- **optional**
 - **type**: This must be the string `basic`.
-- **min_approvals**: The number of approvals that are need to fulfill this condition.
+- **minApprovals**: The number of approvals that are need to fulfill this condition.
 	- It can not be lower than 1.
 	- **Optional**: Defaults to 1.
 	- Must be greater than the number of users available (you cannot request 5 approvals from a team of 4 users)
@@ -286,7 +286,7 @@ rules:
         - user-2
       - teams:
         - team-abc
-        min_approvals: 2
+        minApprovals: 2
 ```
 - The **name** and **conditions** fields have the same requirements that the `basic` rule has.
 - **type**: Must be `or`, `and` or `and-distinct`.
@@ -298,7 +298,7 @@ rules:
 	- Must have at least two options.
 		- If you only need 1 option, then use the `basic` rule.
 	- Each of the options have the following fields:
-		- **min_approvals**: The number of approvals that are need to fulfill this condition.
+		- **minApprovals**: The number of approvals that are need to fulfill this condition.
 			- It can not be lower than 1.
 			- **Optional**: Defaults to 1.
 			- Must be greater than the number of users available (you cannot request 5 approvals from a team of 4 users)
@@ -319,7 +319,7 @@ reviewers:
     - user-2
   - teams:
     - team-abc
-    min_approvals: 2
+    minApprovals: 2
 ```
 This rule will be approved with *any of the following* conditions:
 - If a user who belongs to `team-example` or is `user-1` or `user-2` approves the PR.
@@ -339,7 +339,7 @@ reviewers:
     - user-2
   - teams:
     - team-abc
-    min_approvals: 2
+    minApprovals: 2
 ```
 This rule will be approved if *all the following conditions get fulfilled*:
 - *One* user who belongs to `team-example` or is `user-1` or `user-2` approves the PR.
@@ -367,7 +367,7 @@ The fellows rule has a slight difference to all of the rules:
       - 'example'
   type: fellows
   minRank: 2
-  min_approvals: 2
+  minApprovals: 2
 ```
 The biggest difference is that it doesn’t have a reviewers type (it doesn’t have a `teams` or `users` field); instead, it has a `minRank` field.
 

src/rules/types.ts

@@ -6,12 +6,12 @@ export enum RuleTypes {
   Fellows = "fellows",
 }
 
-export type Reviewers = { users?: string[]; teams?: string[]; min_approvals: number };
+export type Reviewers = { users?: string[]; teams?: string[]; minApprovals: number };
 
 export interface Rule {
   name: string;
   condition: { include: string[]; exclude?: string[] };
-  allowedToSkipRule?: Omit<Reviewers, "min_approvals">;
+  allowedToSkipRule?: Omit<Reviewers, "minApprovals">;
   countAuthor?: boolean;
 }
 
@@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ export interface AndDistinctRule extends Rule {
 export interface FellowsRule extends Rule {
   type: RuleTypes.Fellows;
   minRank: number;
-  min_approvals: number;
+  minApprovals: number;
 }
 
 export interface ConfigurationFile {

src/rules/validator.ts

@@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ const reviewersObj = {
   teams: Joi.array().items(Joi.string()).optional().empty(null),
 };
 
-const reviewerConditionObj = { ...reviewersObj, min_approvals: Joi.number().min(1).default(1) };
+const reviewerConditionObj = { ...reviewersObj, minApprovals: Joi.number().min(1).default(1) };
 
 /** Base rule condition.
  * This are the minimum requirements that all the rules must have.
@@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ const ruleSchema = Joi.object<Rule & { type: string }>().keys({
     include: Joi.array().items(Joi.string()).required(),
     exclude: Joi.array().items(Joi.string()).optional().allow(null),
   }),
-  allowedToSkipRule: Joi.object<Omit<Reviewers, "min_approvals">>().keys(reviewersObj).optional().or("users", "teams"),
+  allowedToSkipRule: Joi.object<Omit<Reviewers, "minApprovals">>().keys(reviewersObj).optional().or("users", "teams"),
   type: Joi.string()
     .valid(RuleTypes.Basic, RuleTypes.And, RuleTypes.Or, RuleTypes.AndDistinct, RuleTypes.Fellows)
     .required(),
@@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ export const generalSchema = Joi.object<ConfigurationFile>().keys({
 });
 
 /** Basic rule schema
- * This rule is quite simple as it only has the min_approvals field and the required reviewers
+ * This rule is quite simple as it only has the minApprovals field and the required reviewers
  */
 export const basicRuleSchema = Joi.object<BasicRule>()
   .keys({ ...reviewerConditionObj, countAuthor: Joi.boolean().default(false) })
@@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ export const otherRulesSchema = Joi.object<AndRule>().keys({
 export const fellowsRuleSchema = Joi.object<FellowsRule>().keys({
   countAuthor: Joi.boolean().default(false),
   minRank: Joi.number().required().min(1).empty(null),
-  min_approvals: Joi.number().min(1).default(1),
+  minApprovals: Joi.number().min(1).default(1),
 });
 
 /**

src/runner.ts

@@ -282,11 +282,11 @@ export class ActionRunner {
     // We get all the users belonging to each 'and distinct' review condition
     for (const reviewers of rule.reviewers) {
       const users = await this.fetchAllUsers(reviewers);
-      requirements.push({ users, requiredApprovals: reviewers.min_approvals });
+      requirements.push({ users, requiredApprovals: reviewers.minApprovals });
     }
 
     // We count how many reviews are needed in total
-    const requiredAmountOfReviews = rule.reviewers.map((r) => r.min_approvals).reduce((a, b) => a + b, 0);
+    const requiredAmountOfReviews = rule.reviewers.map((r) => r.minApprovals).reduce((a, b) => a + b, 0);
     // We get the list of users that approved the PR
     const approvals = await this.prApi.listApprovedReviewsAuthors(rule.countAuthor ?? false);
 
@@ -393,7 +393,7 @@ export class ActionRunner {
    * @see-also ReviewError
    */
   async evaluateCondition(
-    rule: { min_approvals: number } & Reviewers,
+    rule: { minApprovals: number } & Reviewers,
     countAuthor: boolean = false,
   ): Promise<ReviewState> {
     this.logger.debug(JSON.stringify(rule));
@@ -405,9 +405,9 @@ export class ActionRunner {
       throw new Error("No users have been found in the required reviewers");
     }
 
-    if (requiredUsers.length < rule.min_approvals) {
+    if (requiredUsers.length < rule.minApprovals) {
       this.logger.error(
-        `${rule.min_approvals} approvals are required but only ${requiredUsers.length} user's approval count.`,
+        `${rule.minApprovals} approvals are required but only ${requiredUsers.length} user's approval count.`,
       );
       if (rule.teams) {
         this.logger.error(`Allowed teams: ${JSON.stringify(rule.teams)}`);
@@ -423,7 +423,7 @@ export class ActionRunner {
     this.logger.info(`Found ${approvals.length} approvals.`);
 
     // This is the amount of reviews required. To succeed this should be 0 or lower
-    let missingReviews = rule.min_approvals;
+    let missingReviews = rule.minApprovals;
     for (const requiredUser of requiredUsers) {
       // We check for the approvals, if it is a required reviewer we lower the amount of missing reviews
       if (approvals.indexOf(requiredUser) > -1) {
@@ -462,9 +462,9 @@ export class ActionRunner {
       throw new Error(`No users have been found with the rank ${rule.minRank} or above`);
     }
 
-    if (requiredUsers.length < rule.min_approvals) {
+    if (requiredUsers.length < rule.minApprovals) {
       this.logger.error(
-        `${rule.min_approvals} approvals are required but only ${requiredUsers.length} user's approval count.`,
+        `${rule.minApprovals} approvals are required but only ${requiredUsers.length} user's approval count.`,
       );
       throw new Error("The amount of required approvals is smaller than the amount of available users.");
     }
@@ -474,7 +474,7 @@ export class ActionRunner {
     this.logger.info(`Found ${approvals.length} approvals.`);
 
     // This is the amount of reviews required. To succeed this should be 0 or lower
-    let missingReviews = rule.min_approvals;
+    let missingReviews = rule.minApprovals;
     for (const requiredUser of requiredUsers) {
       // We check for the approvals, if it is a required reviewer we lower the amount of missing reviews
       if (approvals.indexOf(requiredUser) > -1) {
@@ -531,7 +531,7 @@ export class ActionRunner {
    * @param reviewers Object with users or teams to fetch members
    * @returns an array with all the users
    */
-  async fetchAllUsers(reviewers: Omit<Reviewers, "min_approvals">): Promise<string[]> {
+  async fetchAllUsers(reviewers: Omit<Reviewers, "minApprovals">): Promise<string[]> {
     const users: Set<string> = new Set<string>();
     if (reviewers.teams) {
       for (const team of reviewers.teams) {

src/test/config.yml

@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ rules:
         - ^\.cargo/.*
       exclude: 
         - ^./gitlab/pipeline/zombienet.yml$
-    min_approvals: 2
+    minApprovals: 2
     type: basic
     teams:
       - ci
@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ rules:
       exclude: 
         - ^polkadot/runtime\/(kusama|polkadot)\/src\/weights\/.+\.rs$
         - ^substrate\/frame\/.+\.md$
-    min_approvals: 2
+    minApprovals: 2
     allowedToSkipRule:
       teams:
         - core-devs
@@ -51,7 +51,7 @@ rules:
         - ^\.gitlab-ci\.yml
         - ^(?!.*\.dic$|.*spellcheck\.toml$)scripts/ci/.*
         - ^\.github/.*
-    min_approvals: 2
+    minApprovals: 2
     type: basic
     teams:
       - core-devs
@@ -67,10 +67,10 @@ rules:
         - ^cumulus/parachains/common/src/[^/]+\.rs$
     type: and-distinct
     reviewers:
-      - min_approvals: 1
+      - minApprovals: 1
         teams:
           - locks-review
-      - min_approvals: 1
+      - minApprovals: 1
         teams:
           - polkadot-review
 
@@ -80,7 +80,7 @@ rules:
     condition: 
       include:
         - ^cumulus/bridges/.*
-    min_approvals: 1
+    minApprovals: 1
     teams:
       - bridges-core
 
@@ -92,10 +92,10 @@ rules:
         - ^substrate/frame/(?!.*(nfts/.*|uniques/.*|babe/.*|grandpa/.*|beefy|merkle-mountain-range/.*|contracts/.*|election|nomination-pools/.*|staking/.*|aura/.*))
     type: "and"
     reviewers:
-      - min_approvals: 2
+      - minApprovals: 2
         teams:
           - core-devs
-      - min_approvals: 1
+      - minApprovals: 1
         teams:
           - frame-coders
 

src/test/rules/andDistinct.test.ts

@@ -114,7 +114,7 @@ describe("'AndDistinctRule' rule parsing", () => {
             reviewers:
               - teams:
                 - team-example
-              - min_approvals: 2
+              - minApprovals: 2
                 users:
                   - abc
                 teams:
@@ -125,13 +125,13 @@ describe("'AndDistinctRule' rule parsing", () => {
       expect(rule.reviewers).toHaveLength(2);
       expect(rule.reviewers[0].teams).toContainEqual("team-example");
       expect(rule.reviewers[0].users).toBeUndefined();
-      expect(rule.reviewers[1].min_approvals).toEqual(2);
+      expect(rule.reviewers[1].minApprovals).toEqual(2);
       expect(rule.reviewers[1].users).toContainEqual("abc");
       expect(rule.reviewers[1].teams).toContainEqual("xyz");
     });
   });
 
-  test("should default min_approvals to 1", async () => {
+  test("should default minApprovals to 1", async () => {
     api.getConfigFile.mockResolvedValue(`
         rules:
           - name: Test review
@@ -150,13 +150,13 @@ describe("'AndDistinctRule' rule parsing", () => {
     const config = await runner.getConfigFile("");
     const [rule] = config.rules;
     if (rule.type === "and-distinct") {
-      expect(rule.reviewers[0].min_approvals).toEqual(1);
+      expect(rule.reviewers[0].minApprovals).toEqual(1);
     } else {
       throw new Error(`Rule type ${rule.type} is invalid`);
     }
   });
 
-  test("should fail with min_approvals in negative", async () => {
+  test("should fail with minApprovals in negative", async () => {
     api.getConfigFile.mockResolvedValue(`
         rules:
           - name: Test review
@@ -167,16 +167,16 @@ describe("'AndDistinctRule' rule parsing", () => {
                 - 'example'
             type: and-distinct
             reviewers:
-              - min_approvals: -99
+              - minApprovals: -99
                 users:
                 - user-example
         `);
     await expect(runner.getConfigFile("")).rejects.toThrowError(
-      '"reviewers[0].min_approvals" must be greater than or equal to 1',
+      '"reviewers[0].minApprovals" must be greater than or equal to 1',
     );
   });
 
-  test("should fail with min_approvals in 0", async () => {
+  test("should fail with minApprovals in 0", async () => {
     api.getConfigFile.mockResolvedValue(`
         rules:
           - name: Test review
@@ -187,12 +187,12 @@ describe("'AndDistinctRule' rule parsing", () => {
                 - 'example'
             type: and-distinct
             reviewers:
-              - min_approvals: 0
+              - minApprovals: 0
                 users:
                   - user-example
         `);
     await expect(runner.getConfigFile("")).rejects.toThrowError(
-      '"reviewers[0].min_approvals" must be greater than or equal to 1',
+      '"reviewers[0].minApprovals" must be greater than or equal to 1',
     );
   });
 });