Scopes by philocalyst · Pull Request #179 · cococonscious/koji

philocalyst · 2026-02-21T04:22:11Z

No description provided.

…terface

This PR contains the following updates: | Package | Type | Update | Change | |---|---|---|---| | [actions/cache](https://redirect.github.com/actions/cache) | action | major | `v4.3.0` -> `v5.0.1` | --- ### Release Notes <details> <summary>actions/cache (actions/cache)</summary> ### [`v5.0.1`](https://redirect.github.com/actions/cache/compare/v5.0.0...v5.0.1) [Compare Source](https://redirect.github.com/actions/cache/compare/v5.0.0...v5.0.1) ### [`v5.0.0`](https://redirect.github.com/actions/cache/compare/v4.3.0...v5.0.0) [Compare Source](https://redirect.github.com/actions/cache/compare/v4.3.0...v5.0.0) </details> --- ### Configuration 📅 **Schedule**: Branch creation - Between 12:00 AM and 03:59 AM, only on Monday ( * 0-3 * * 1 ) (UTC), Automerge - At any time (no schedule defined). 🚦 **Automerge**: Disabled by config. Please merge this manually once you are satisfied. ♻ **Rebasing**: Whenever PR is behind base branch, or you tick the rebase/retry checkbox. 🔕 **Ignore**: Close this PR and you won't be reminded about this update again. --- - [ ] If you want to rebase/retry this PR, check this box --- This PR was generated by [Mend Renovate](https://mend.io/renovate/). View the [repository job log](https://developer.mend.io/github/cococonscious/koji).  Co-authored-by: renovate[bot] <29139614+renovate[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>

…us#165) This PR contains the following updates: | Package | Type | Update | Change | |---|---|---|---| | [codecov/codecov-action](https://redirect.github.com/codecov/codecov-action) | action | patch | `v5.5.1` -> `v5.5.2` | --- ### Release Notes <details> <summary>codecov/codecov-action (codecov/codecov-action)</summary> ### [`v5.5.2`](https://redirect.github.com/codecov/codecov-action/blob/HEAD/CHANGELOG.md#v552) [Compare Source](https://redirect.github.com/codecov/codecov-action/compare/v5.5.1...v5.5.2) ##### What's Changed **Full Changelog**: <https://github.com/codecov/codecov-action/compare/v5.5.1..v5.5.2> </details> --- ### Configuration 📅 **Schedule**: Branch creation - Between 12:00 AM and 03:59 AM, only on Monday ( * 0-3 * * 1 ) (UTC), Automerge - At any time (no schedule defined). 🚦 **Automerge**: Disabled by config. Please merge this manually once you are satisfied. ♻ **Rebasing**: Whenever PR is behind base branch, or you tick the rebase/retry checkbox. 🔕 **Ignore**: Close this PR and you won't be reminded about this update again. --- - [ ] If you want to rebase/retry this PR, check this box --- This PR was generated by [Mend Renovate](https://mend.io/renovate/). View the [repository job log](https://developer.mend.io/github/cococonscious/koji).  Co-authored-by: renovate[bot] <29139614+renovate[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>

This PR contains the following updates: | Package | Type | Update | Change | |---|---|---|---| | [actions/checkout](https://redirect.github.com/actions/checkout) | action | patch | `v6.0.0` -> `v6.0.1` | --- ### Release Notes <details> <summary>actions/checkout (actions/checkout)</summary> ### [`v6.0.1`](https://redirect.github.com/actions/checkout/compare/v6.0.0...v6.0.1) [Compare Source](https://redirect.github.com/actions/checkout/compare/v6.0.0...v6.0.1) </details> --- ### Configuration 📅 **Schedule**: Branch creation - Between 12:00 AM and 03:59 AM, only on Monday ( * 0-3 * * 1 ) (UTC), Automerge - At any time (no schedule defined). 🚦 **Automerge**: Disabled by config. Please merge this manually once you are satisfied. ♻ **Rebasing**: Whenever PR is behind base branch, or you tick the rebase/retry checkbox. 🔕 **Ignore**: Close this PR and you won't be reminded about this update again. --- - [ ] If you want to rebase/retry this PR, check this box --- This PR was generated by [Mend Renovate](https://mend.io/renovate/). View the [repository job log](https://developer.mend.io/github/cococonscious/koji).  Co-authored-by: renovate[bot] <29139614+renovate[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>

Multiple macOS versions as a requirement to eventually have koji in homebrew-core

Keeping cocogitto for the commits for now but uses Gix for traversal, etc., and at some point, when Gix is ready, replace cocogitto with it.

cococonscious · 2026-02-25T09:57:12Z

Besides the conflicts, make sure to consider my comment in the previous PR: #161 (comment) and imo it should also be possible to configure to force the use of the configured scopes or not (and with that if an empty scope is allowed or not)

codecov · 2026-03-04T02:19:30Z

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 86.73835% with 37 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/lib/questions.rs	89.62%	14 Missing ⚠️
src/lib/scope.rs	88.42%	14 Missing ⚠️
src/lib/config.rs	60.86%	9 Missing ⚠️

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/lib/config.rs	`84.74% <60.86%> (-15.26%)`	⬇️
src/lib/questions.rs	`93.92% <89.62%> (-3.41%)`	⬇️
src/lib/scope.rs	`88.42% <88.42%> (ø)`

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

cococonscious

Looks good besides the review comment, also, I have two other points to consider:

The force_scope config key naming is a bit misleading, I think a more accurate name would be force_config_scopes
We should show the configured scope description in the selection prompt, not only because it's otherwise obsolete but also to differentiate from the detected scopes

philocalyst · 2026-03-11T15:30:42Z

I'll address #2, but #1 I wrote because it's namespaced under Config. So Config.force_config_scopes feels redundant. You'll see updates later today. ▰▰▰▰▰ Miles Wirth 🙃

…

From: Finley Thomalla ***@***.***> Sent: 11 March 2026 01:07 To: cococonscious/koji ***@***.***> Cc: Miles Wirht ***@***.***>, Author ***@***.***> Subject: Re: [cococonscious/koji] Scopes (PR #179) @cococonscious requested changes on this pull request. Looks good besides the review comment, also, I have two other points to consider: - The `force_scope` config key naming is a bit misleading, I think a more accurate name would be `force_config_scopes` - We should show the configured scope description in the selection prompt, not only because it's otherwise obsolete but also to differentiate from the detected scopes > @@ -148,6 +163,21 @@ impl Autocomplete for ScopeAutocompleter { } fn prompt_scope(config: &Config) -> Result<Option<String>> { + if config.force_scope && !config.commit_scopes.is_empty() { + let scope_values: Vec<String> = config.commit_scopes.keys().cloned().collect(); + + let prompt = Select::new("What's the scope of this change?", scope_values) + .with_render_config(get_render_config()); + + let result = if config.allow_empty_scope { + prompt.prompt_skippable()? + } else { + Some(prompt.prompt()?) Pressing \<Esc> cancels the prompt with a generic error message, please find a way to improve it (for example "Error: Scope cannot be empty" -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: #179 (review) You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Message ID: ***@***.***>

…stics

cococonscious · 2026-03-13T10:42:13Z

I understand your point about the scoping of the config property, and it does make sense, but it's a bit confusing because "force scope" could be misunderstood as "you must specify a scope" (which the other variable is for so it is understandable, yes, but it does require an extra thinking step).

Thanks for the changes. I did find a bug though, when setting the following: force_scope = false and allow_empty_scope = false, hitting <Esc> will just continue instead of throwing like when force_scope = true.

Also, I find it hard to justify adding another error handling dependency, could we not either replace everything with thiserror or implement your changes in anyhow?

Lastly, the descriptions of the commit scopes defined in the config are still not visible.

Thanks,
Finley

philocalyst · 2026-03-14T13:59:12Z

The error handling thing: I think if we want to move to stronger error handling, the answer is 100% thiserror!! It's meant for structured error cases. The other thing we could consider is [Ariadne](https://lib.rs/crates/ariadne) or [Miette](https://lib.rs/crates/miette), which would place us in the top 1% for these diagnostics, but would require a larger refactor. I could start a separate PR that adds that to merge before this one so consistency stays. I also was thinking that globbing would pair nicely with this scope configuration, as a lot of scopes are bound purely to specific sets of files from within a codebase. I have a scope for my flake.nix for example. That way users could manage LOTS of scopes without it polluting the main dialog, which would be reserved for the more universal options. ▰▰▰▰▰ Miles Wirth 🙃

…

From: Finley Thomalla ***@***.***> Sent: 13 March 2026 03:42 To: cococonscious/koji ***@***.***> Cc: Miles Wirht ***@***.***>, Author ***@***.***> Subject: Re: [cococonscious/koji] Scopes (PR #179) cococonscious left a comment (cococonscious/koji#179) I understand your point about the scoping of the config property, and it does make sense, but it's a bit confusing because "force scope" could be misunderstood as "you must specify a scope" (which the other variable is for so it is understandable, yes, but it does require an extra thinking step). Thanks for the changes. I did find a bug though, when setting the following: `force_scope = false` and `allow_empty_scope = false`, hitting \<Esc> will just continue instead of throwing like when `force_scope = true`. Also, I find it hard to justify adding another error handling dependency, could we not either replace everything with `thiserror` or implement your changes in `anyhow`? Lastly, the descriptions of the commit scopes defined in the config are still not visible. Thanks, Finley -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: #179 (comment) You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Message ID: ***@***.***>

cococonscious · 2026-03-17T09:10:11Z

I think if we want to move to stronger error handling, the answer is 100% thiserror!! ... I could start a separate PR that adds that to merge before this one so consistency stays.

Yes, please! That would be great.

The other thing we could consider is Ariadne or Miette, ...

While they look great, I think they're overkill for the simple errors that are common in koji, unless you disagree...

I also was thinking that globbing would pair nicely with this scope configuration, ...

Sorry, I'm a bit lost on what exactly you mean by this, could you give me a concrete example?

philocalyst · 2026-03-17T16:00:12Z

Okay, I'll look into the error handling sometime soon! They are basically overkill, just thinking if the config becomes a bigger interface it would help, and we can fallback to the default case elsewhere? But definitely to think about LATER. Yes, something like flakes = "/flake.nix" core = "/crates/core/**/*.rs" build = ["/build.rs", "/justfile"] So if changes impact a match, the scope is pre-assigned. Which assigns these things. On second thought, a Regex or FancyRegex implementation could make more sense, as I see the deliniation getting advanced, and arrays feel like a clunky answer. ▰▰▰▰▰ Miles Wirth 🙃

…

From: Finley Thomalla ***@***.***> Sent: 17 March 2026 02:10 To: cococonscious/koji ***@***.***> Cc: Miles Wirht ***@***.***>, Author ***@***.***> Subject: Re: [cococonscious/koji] Scopes (PR #179) cococonscious left a comment (cococonscious/koji#179) > I think if we want to move to stronger error handling, the answer is 100% thiserror!! ... I could start a separate PR that adds that to merge before this one so consistency stays. Yes, please! That would be great. > The other thing we could consider is [Ariadne](https://lib.rs/crates/ariadne) or [Miette](https://lib.rs/crates/miette), ... While they look great, I think they're overkill for the simple errors that are common in koji, unless you disagree... > I also was thinking that globbing would pair nicely with this scope configuration, ... Sorry, I'm a bit lost on what exactly you mean by this, could you give me a concrete example? -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: #179 (comment) You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Message ID: ***@***.***>

philocalyst · 2026-04-20T11:14:57Z

The thing about working on a tool for commits is that you develop standards just by making ergonomic decisions like this. I personally lean towards the atomic commit model, so my answer is "neither" as I believe any situation where you need to make that cross cutting change should be grouped into a PR.

If that's something you agree with, that can be the stance, but long-term we may need to adopt a particular committing philosphy as to not grow too complex.

philocalyst · 2026-04-20T11:19:56Z

Regex is also a great idea, in that we could use the implementation of ast-grep to both match on filenames and on code structure. Then you could do things like "if this modified function holds the test annotation, mark its scope as test".

Which is very exciting and a fair bit more technical, but I believe personally do-able. I volunteer it really because it differentiates Koji and uses ast-grep in a creative way (I find it difficult to use practically otherwise, despite how capable it is)

philocalyst · 2026-04-20T12:39:45Z

We could use ast_greps YAML input (Appropriated to TOML of course), which I found when researching -- it makes incorporating this feel very "right" with the current config structure :)))

cococonscious · 2026-04-27T12:03:01Z

I agree with you on the atomic commits, although I suspect that in reality most people using koji will not fully adopt that philosophy, so your (great) idea about using ast-grep might not work as expected for everyone. I think it would be an awesome addition, but it should be gated behind a feature flag for now, until we get some experience and user reports about how they use and like it. The regex config approach can be in the default feature-set though. If you're willing to, please do implement both 🥇
I'll try to review it faster than I've been replying in this thread, promise :)

philocalyst · 2026-05-01T20:50:05Z

Feeling a lot better about this! @cococonscious

philocalyst · 2026-05-21T16:12:43Z

@cococonscious Following up

cococonscious

I like the general idea, but please do look at my review comments and answer / fix the issues, thanks! Please also don't forget to add unit tests for the new functions, covering both positive and negative cases, for example: looks_like_regex

PS: Sorry for the late replies and reviews 😮‍💨

cococonscious · 2026-05-22T11:19:14Z

 config = { version = "0.15", features = ["toml"] }
 xdg = "3.0"
 gix = "0.80.0"
+ast-grep-config = { version = "0.42.1" }


Please put these features behind a feature flag. I don't mind if it's in the default features, but I want to be able to exclude it if necessary.

@philocalyst Also not resolved, compile with --no-default-features to check.

cococonscious · 2026-05-22T11:54:22Z

+
+- Location: In the normal Koji config file alongside the rest of the scope config
+- Optional: `true`
+- Description: Ast-grep rules can pre-assign commit scopes from structural code matches.


I think it'd be great if the pre-assigned scope, when an ast-grep rule matches, would show up in the prompt somehow, I think nicest would be something like this:

> What type of change are you committing? feat > What's the scope of this change? foo <---- This line should have been printed automatically instead of being omitted. > Write a short, imperative tense description of the change: bar

If this is not possible, for example if the prompting library doesn't allow for it, print it in some other fitting way, I just don't like that it's invisible.

@philocalyst This is not resolved, it's still not showing the assigned scope:

> What type of change are you committing? feat > Write a short, imperative tense description of the change: foo > ... feat(lib): foo

cococonscious · 2026-05-22T12:00:57Z

+        }
+
+        let full_path = workdir.join(relative_path);
+        let Ok(source) = std::fs::read_to_string(&full_path) else {


Correct me if I'm wrong but the way it seems to me is that it checks files by path, not by the staged blobs, meaning that if you make changes, stage them, then make changes again but don't stage those, the rules will match on the latter, unchanged changes as well.

Make sure to add a test to catch this edge-case after fixing it.

@philocalyst Same here, not resolved.

cococonscious · 2026-05-22T12:04:46Z

+}
+
+pub fn detect_scope_matches(repo: &Repository, config: &Config) -> Result<ScopeMatches> {
+    let changed_paths = staged_paths(repo)?;


Is the behavior of this example expected?:

tests/a.rs renamed to src/a.rs

old path (tests/a.rs) matches filter but cannot be read -> skipped

new path (src/a.rs) can be read, but doesn’t match filter -> no rule applied
=> result: no AST scope match, even though the staged change involved a test file rename.

@philocalyst I think this is also still open, if not, please answer with an explanation before resolving.

philocalyst · 2026-06-04T16:59:45Z

My own turn for a slow response! Pretty happy with how things are looking right now, wondering if you'd like to try to use it to add a few local rules for Koji itself and see if it's intuitive or not with a real use-case? That could be fun :)

philocalyst and others added 18 commits December 10, 2025 10:13

Switched from interfacing to git2 to gitoxide for basic repostiory

91d504c

Switched to using gitoxide and converted logic to work within that in…

41d70f0

…terface

Switched the integrations tests to make use of gitoxide

dd14870

Added gix dependency

7c488dd

yo hi gix

9534ce9

removed vendored openssl

451614d

gix update

9107ecd

added scoping here

a72c600

added testing for scoping

f5a758f

git2 for testing

168645e

test: fix rexpect windows failures, more in ci (cococonscious#168)

4f0b43f

Multiple macOS versions as a requirement to eventually have koji in homebrew-core

feat: replace git2 with gix (cococonscious#174)

ebab035

Keeping cocogitto for the commits for now but uses Gix for traversal, etc., and at some point, when Gix is ready, replace cocogitto with it.

ci: replace release-plz with release-please (cococonscious#176)

14cdf12

ci(release-please): don't include component in tag (cococonscious#178)

2143b9f

added scoping here

2e766da

philocalyst added 2 commits February 27, 2026 23:52

feat: add force_scope and allow_empty_scope options

5c01a20

test: cleanup and add integration tests

ebdec6e

cococonscious requested changes Mar 11, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/lib/questions.rs Outdated

philocalyst added 2 commits March 11, 2026 17:59

deps: added thiserror

82f611d

questions: added much better error handling, and prompt config diagno…

06c162c

…stics

cococonscious mentioned this pull request Apr 28, 2026

koji is not friendly to non-ASCII character support #147

Open

philocalyst added 8 commits May 1, 2026 15:10

Added integration testing for the advacned scope configuration

71a8863

Added new file for the complex regex/ast-grep implementaiton here

f2b9808

Updated configuration to accept the special scopes

2e4de45

Linked scope in

69e2db7

Full hinting within questions

34e522d

Updated README

0f3b7a5

added deps

b7c7db7

Passing scope through

72b5eb9

cococonscious requested changes May 22, 2026

View reviewed changes

philocalyst added 10 commits June 4, 2026 12:27

Remove regex heuristic; patterns are always regex

446b0ee

Make ast-grep an optional feature

5248b47

Inline patterns and ast_grep into CommitScope

79559e5

Show scope descriptions in autocomplete

e1fc724

Pre-stage tracked files before scope detection with --all

cf40788

Update tests and README for new scope config schema

5b3da8b

removed glob, pure regex

88b0489

simplifications fr

240d84e

renaming

401e571

big cleanups and refactors to questions

f4e3e12

Better display hanling

48e2539

philocalyst force-pushed the scopes branch from 65dcce4 to 48e2539 Compare June 4, 2026 18:54

clippy fixes

84b7501

Conversation

philocalyst commented Feb 21, 2026

Uh oh!

cococonscious commented Feb 25, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented Mar 4, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

cococonscious left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

philocalyst commented Mar 11, 2026 via email

Uh oh!

cococonscious commented Mar 13, 2026

Uh oh!

philocalyst commented Mar 14, 2026 via email

Uh oh!

cococonscious commented Mar 17, 2026

Uh oh!

philocalyst commented Mar 17, 2026 via email

Uh oh!

philocalyst commented Apr 20, 2026

Uh oh!

philocalyst commented Apr 20, 2026

Uh oh!

philocalyst commented Apr 20, 2026

Uh oh!

cococonscious commented Apr 27, 2026

Uh oh!

philocalyst commented May 1, 2026

Uh oh!

philocalyst commented May 21, 2026

Uh oh!

cococonscious left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

philocalyst commented Jun 4, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

cococonscious commented Feb 25, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov Bot commented Mar 4, 2026 •

edited

Loading