Skip to content

[PROD RELEASE] - WorkManager Changes - Connect Decommission #1631

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
wants to merge 34 commits into from

Conversation

kkartunov
Copy link
Contributor

Changes to be done in Work Manager while decommissioning Connect.

Updates:

  • Allow hyphen in url - asset library
  • feat: added show only my projects for project managers
  • PM-973 - invite by email

himaniraghav3 and others added 30 commits March 26, 2025 16:04
…ression

Co-authored-by: Copilot Autofix powered by AI <62310815+github-advanced-security[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
PM-971 Allow hyphen in url - asset library
fix(PM-974) Allow project managers to view all projects
feat(PM-974): allow PM to view users and delete users from project
fix(PM-974): projects list in challenges tab
Copy link
Contributor Author

@kkartunov kkartunov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

test

Copy link
Contributor Author

@kkartunov kkartunov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

test 2

types:
- opened
- synchronize
permissions: write-all
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The permission write-all is quite broad. Consider specifying more granular permissions to adhere to the principle of least privilege. Refer to GitHub's permissions documentation for more details.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@kkartunov kkartunov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

test 2

types:
- opened
- synchronize
permissions: write-all
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The permission write-all is quite broad. Consider specifying more granular permissions to adhere to the principle of least privilege. Refer to GitHub's permissions documentation for more details.

- name: TC AI PR Reviewer
uses: topcoder-platform/tc-ai-pr-reviewer@master
with:
GITHUB_TOKEN: ${{ secrets.GITHUB_TOKEN }} # The GITHUB_TOKEN is there by default so you just need to keep it like it is and not necessarily need to add it as secret as it will throw an error. [More Details](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/security-guides/automatic-token-authentication#about-the-github_token-secret)
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The comment about the GITHUB_TOKEN is informative but might be better placed in documentation or a README file rather than in the workflow file itself. Consider removing it from here to keep the workflow file clean.

Copy link

@github-actions github-actions bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

TC AI PR Reviewer executed successfully via LLM: gpt-4o. Please check the comments on the code.

types:
- opened
- synchronize
permissions:
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The change from permissions: write-all to specifying pull-requests: write is more restrictive, which is generally a good practice for security. However, ensure that this change does not inadvertently remove necessary permissions for other actions that might be required by the workflow. Double-check if additional permissions are needed for other parts of the workflow.

@@ -58,7 +58,7 @@
/**
* regex for url validation
*/
const urlRegex = /((https?):\/\/)?(www.)?[a-z0-9]+(\.[a-z]{2,}){1,3}(#?\/?(?:[a-zA-Z0-9#]+))*\/?(\?[a-zA-Z0-9-_]+=[a-zA-Z0-9-%]+&?)?$/
const urlRegex = /((https?):\/\/)?(www\.)?[\w-]+(\.[a-z]{2,}){1,3}(#?\/?(?:[a-zA-Z0-9#-]+))*\/?(\?[a-zA-Z0-9-_]+=[a-zA-Z0-9-%]+&?)?$/

Check failure

Code scanning / CodeQL

Inefficient regular expression High

This part of the regular expression may cause exponential backtracking on strings containing many repetitions of '#'.

Copilot Autofix

AI 2 months ago

To fix the problem, we need to modify the regular expression to remove the ambiguity that causes exponential backtracking. Specifically, we can replace the ambiguous character class [a-zA-Z0-9#-] with a more precise character class that avoids ambiguity. Additionally, we can simplify the regular expression to ensure it performs efficiently.

  • Replace [a-zA-Z0-9#-]+ with a more specific character class that avoids ambiguity.
  • Ensure the regular expression still matches valid URLs without causing performance issues.
Suggested changeset 1
src/util/validation.js

Autofix patch

Autofix patch
Run the following command in your local git repository to apply this patch
cat << 'EOF' | git apply
diff --git a/src/util/validation.js b/src/util/validation.js
--- a/src/util/validation.js
+++ b/src/util/validation.js
@@ -60,3 +60,3 @@
  */
-const urlRegex = /((https?):\/\/)?(www\.)?[\w-]+(\.[a-z]{2,}){1,3}(#?\/?(?:[a-zA-Z0-9#-]+))*\/?(\?[a-zA-Z0-9-_]+=[a-zA-Z0-9-%]+&?)?$/
+const urlRegex = /((https?):\/\/)?(www\.)?[\w-]+(\.[a-z]{2,}){1,3}(#?\/?(?:[\w-]+))*\/?(\?[a-zA-Z0-9-_]+=[a-zA-Z0-9-%]+&?)?$/
 
EOF
@@ -60,3 +60,3 @@
*/
const urlRegex = /((https?):\/\/)?(www\.)?[\w-]+(\.[a-z]{2,}){1,3}(#?\/?(?:[a-zA-Z0-9#-]+))*\/?(\?[a-zA-Z0-9-_]+=[a-zA-Z0-9-%]+&?)?$/
const urlRegex = /((https?):\/\/)?(www\.)?[\w-]+(\.[a-z]{2,}){1,3}(#?\/?(?:[\w-]+))*\/?(\?[a-zA-Z0-9-_]+=[a-zA-Z0-9-%]+&?)?$/

Copilot is powered by AI and may make mistakes. Always verify output.
@kkartunov kkartunov closed this Apr 8, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants