chore: Revamp of labels

[Jiralite]

Important

The label synchronisation workflow must be temporarily disabled for this to merge.

• Pull requests now have a dedicated scope, taken from the commit convention and a backport scope
• Rather than the "interactions" and "threads" labels which were the only kind of feature-related labels we had, they are now a "type". Added as organised from the core package with a few others
  • "api changes" and "api support" have been deduplicated to "type:discord update" (an update to the Discord API may require a change or a new feature to support)
• Added descriptions on when to use some triaging labels

Some labels were removed. Examples:

• "discussion" was removed as GitHub Discussions exist
• "question (please use Discord instead)" was removed as GitHub Discussions exist
  • If a discussion is not required, then this should be labelled as invalid
• Etc.

---

If interactions was renamed to type:interactions, wouldn't that remove all the labels from previous issues and pull requests?

Yes. However, that can be avoided with the following steps:

1. Disable the label synchronisation workflow before this pull request is merged (this is harmless)
2. Rename the label
3. Enable the workflow
4. Optionally run the workflow

crazy-max/ghaction-github-labeler will then identify that type:interactions exists and will not delete any labels, but make amendments, if any.

How will the deduplication of "api changes" and "api support" work?

Similarily to the above question, we can rename "api changes" to "type:discord update" and those with that label will be updated. However, we cannot rename "api support" to "type:discord update" as label names must be unique.

We can automatically modify all those issues and pull requests. For example, with issues:

gh issue list --json number --label "api support" --limit 1000 --state all | jq --raw-output '.[].number' | while read -r issue_number; do
  gh issue edit $issue_number --add-label "type:discord update"
  gh issue edit $issue_number --remove-label "api support"
done

Or, we could do nothing. Both are effortless.

---

I'll be doing the manual work once this merges. No pressure on anyone else!

This is a time to make any other label changes! Open to suggestions.

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name	Status	Preview	Comments	Updated (UTC)
discord-js	✅ Ready (Inspect)	Visit Preview	💬 Add feedback	Jul 1, 2024 2:30pm

1 Ignored Deployment

Name	Status	Preview	Comments	Updated (UTC)
discord-js-guide	⬜️ Ignored (Inspect)	Visit Preview		Jul 1, 2024 2:30pm

[ckohen]

Is this color change intentional?

[Jiralite]

I feel black would stand out more as a bug. Welcome to feedback on this.

[ckohen]

I don't think i've actually seen black in the ui, so....what's it look like 🤷

[iCrawl]

Absolutely not

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 40.28%. Comparing base (ab8bf0f) to head (a055170).

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #10317       +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage   50.37%   40.28%   -10.09%     
===========================================
  Files         228      184       -44     
  Lines       20641    16898     -3743     
  Branches     1240      953      -287     
===========================================
- Hits        10397     6807     -3590     
+ Misses      10199    10046      -153     
  Partials       45       45               

Flag	Coverage Δ
brokers	64.14% <ø> (ø)
collection	99.32% <ø> (ø)
formatters	99.31% <ø> (ø)
guide	0.00% <ø> (ø)
proxy	78.52% <ø> (ø)
rest	92.68% <ø> (ø)
util	68.86% <ø> (ø)
utilities	100.00% <ø> (ø)
voice	63.64% <ø> (ø)
website	0.00% <ø> (ø)
ws	51.93% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[didinele]

not sure on the black for bug but otherwise lgtm