Aviac/codeberg-cli
10
293
Fork 33
Code Issues 13 Pull requests 2 Projects Releases 6 Packages Wiki Activity

fix: use issue.number instead of issue.id in comment command #256

Closed
timstoop wants to merge 5 commits from timstoop/codeberg-cli:fix-issue-comment-404 into main
pull from: timstoop/codeberg-cli:fix-issue-comment-404
merge into: Aviac:main
Conversation 3 Commits 5 Files changed 2 +58 -1
timstoop commented 2025-10-11 19:04:48 +02:00
Contributor
Copy link

Summary

Fixes #224 where berg issue comment returned a 404 error when the issue's internal database ID differed from its visible issue number.

Problem

The issue comment command was using issue.id (internal database ID) instead of issue.number (the visible issue number like #1, #2, etc.) when making the API call. The Forgejo API expects the issue number, not the internal ID.

When these values differ (which happens in repositories with closed/deleted issues), the API returns a 404 error.

Solution

Changed src/actions/issue/comment.rs:93 to use issue.number instead of issue.id, aligning with how other commands like issue edit already work.

Testing

  • The code compiles and passes cargo clippy
  • Manually verified the fix addresses the root cause
  • A test case has been added to main branch that would catch this regression

Related

This fix aligns with the pattern used in other commands:

  • issue edit uses issue.number (line 76)
  • milestone view uses issue.number (line 106)

Closes #224

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

## Summary Fixes #224 where `berg issue comment` returned a 404 error when the issue's internal database ID differed from its visible issue number. ## Problem The `issue comment` command was using `issue.id` (internal database ID) instead of `issue.number` (the visible issue number like #1, #2, etc.) when making the API call. The Forgejo API expects the issue number, not the internal ID. When these values differ (which happens in repositories with closed/deleted issues), the API returns a 404 error. ## Solution Changed `src/actions/issue/comment.rs:93` to use `issue.number` instead of `issue.id`, aligning with how other commands like `issue edit` already work. ## Testing - The code compiles and passes cargo clippy - Manually verified the fix addresses the root cause - A test case has been added to main branch that would catch this regression ## Related This fix aligns with the pattern used in other commands: - `issue edit` uses `issue.number` (line 76) - `milestone view` uses `issue.number` (line 106) Closes #224 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)
Fixes #224 where commenting on issues returned a 404 error when the
issue's internal database ID differed from its visible issue number.

The Forgejo API expects the issue number (e.g., #1, #2) not the
internal ID. This aligns with how other commands like `issue edit`
already work.

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
Fixes the same ID vs number bug in `berg issue view --comments` that
was fixed for `berg issue comment` in the previous commit. The view
command was using issue.id instead of issue.number in two places:

1. Line 88: JSON output mode with --comments flag
2. Line 144: Pretty output mode with --comments flag

Both now correctly use issue.number to align with the Forgejo API
expectations.

Also adds test case `issueViewCommentsWithDifferentIdAndNumber` to
verify the fix works correctly when issue ID differs from issue number.

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
timstoop commented 2025-10-12 14:36:12 +02:00
Author
Contributor
Copy link

While reviewing the codebase, we found the same bug in berg issue view --comments (both JSON and Pretty output modes). The view command was also using issue.id instead of issue.number when fetching comments.

Since this is the exact same root cause (API expects issue numbers, not internal database IDs), I've added the fix to this PR along with a test case that would have caught both bugs.

Changes in the latest commit:

  • Fixed src/actions/issue/view.rs:88 (JSON output mode)
  • Fixed src/actions/issue/view.rs:144 (Pretty output mode)
  • Added test issueViewCommentsWithDifferentIdAndNumber
While reviewing the codebase, we found the same bug in `berg issue view --comments` (both JSON and Pretty output modes). The view command was also using `issue.id` instead of `issue.number` when fetching comments. Since this is the exact same root cause (API expects issue numbers, not internal database IDs), I've added the fix to this PR along with a test case that would have caught both bugs. Changes in the latest commit: - Fixed `src/actions/issue/view.rs:88` (JSON output mode) - Fixed `src/actions/issue/view.rs:144` (Pretty output mode) - Added test `issueViewCommentsWithDifferentIdAndNumber`
Resolved conflict in src/actions/issue/view.rs:
- Kept upstream's simplified owner_repo() call
- Kept PR's fix using issue.number instead of issue.id
Per feedback on PR #255, keeping PRs focused on single fixes.
The view.rs fixes will be moved to a separate PR.
timstoop commented 2025-10-12 20:33:34 +02:00
Author
Contributor
Copy link

Split the fix for view.rs off into its own branch, to keep the reviewing as focussed as possible.

Split the fix for view.rs off into its own branch, to keep the reviewing as focussed as possible.
Aviac commented 2025-10-13 19:25:18 +02:00
Owner
Copy link

Sorry for how this went here. I just now realize that you also tackled the issue. I was writing a test which could properly reproduce the issue since this was non trivial. The fix itself is now already merged!

Sorry for how this went here. I just now realize that you also tackled the issue. I was writing a test which could properly reproduce the issue since this was non trivial. The fix itself is now already merged!
Aviac closed this pull request 2025-10-13 19:25:20 +02:00

Pull request closed

Please reopen this pull request to perform a merge.
Sign in to join this conversation.
Reviewers
No reviewers
Labels
Clear labels   
actions

   
bug

Something is not working

  
build

   
chore

   
CI

   
cleanup

   
CLI

   
contribution welcome

Contributions are very welcome, get started here

  
docs

No description

  
duplicate

This issue or pull request already exists

  
enhancement

   
feature

   
fix

   
good first issue

Interested in contributing? Get started here.

  
help wanted

Need some help

  
invalid

Something is wrong

  
perf

   
question

More information is needed

  
refactor

   
release

   
revert

   
style

   
test

   
tracking

No description

  
UI

   
upstream

Related to an upstream repository, already reported there

  
UX
No labels
actions
bug
build
chore
CI
cleanup
CLI
contribution welcome
docs
duplicate
enhancement
feature
fix
good first issue
help wanted
invalid
perf
question
refactor
release
revert
style
test
tracking
UI
upstream
UX
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No items
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
No assignees
2 participants
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference
Aviac/codeberg-cli!256
No description provided.