feat: add detailed file reviewer section to comment

[KZhu-mmllc]

Summary / Background

Adds a new detailed_reviewers boolean option in codeowners.toml (defaults to false). Setting to true adds a collapsible section in the required reviews comment. Expanding the section shows a list of changed files with the associated reviewers.

[pooyaw]

🎉 Snyk checks have passed. No issues have been found so far.

✅ security/snyk check is complete. No issues have been found. (View Details)

✅ license/snyk check is complete. No issues have been found. (View Details)

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @KZhu-mmllc, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request introduces a new feature that enhances the codeowners review comment by providing a detailed list of files and their corresponding reviewers. This feature is controlled by a new configuration option in codeowners.toml and can be enabled or disabled as needed. The changes include modifications to the configuration loading, comment generation, and testing to ensure the feature works as expected.

Highlights

• New Feature: Detailed Reviewers: Introduces a detailed_reviewers option in codeowners.toml. When set to true, the codeowners comment will include a collapsible section listing changed files and their associated reviewers.
• Configuration Option: Adds a boolean detailed_reviewers field to the Config struct in internal/config/config.go to control the new feature.
• Comment Enhancement: Modifies internal/app/app.go to include the detailed file reviewers list in the review status comment if the detailed_reviewers option is enabled.
• Testing: Adds a new test case TestCommentDetailedReviewers in internal/app/app_test.go to verify the correct behavior of the detailed reviewers feature.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point in your pull request via creating an issue comment (i.e. comment on the pull request page) using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in issue comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist is currently in preview and may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments to provide feedback.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request introduces a detailed_reviewers option to display a file-by-file breakdown of reviewers in the PR comment. The implementation is straightforward, but I've identified a couple of areas for improvement in the helper functions for generating the output string. My suggestions focus on improving efficiency, ensuring deterministic output for consistency and test stability, and addressing a minor security concern with format strings. The new tests are a great addition.

[github-actions]

Codeowners approval required for this PR:

• ✅ @BakerNet or @zbedforrest

[BakerNet]

LGTM - thank you for the contribution!