Skip to content

ci: add team label workflow#9477

Draft
amitabh94 wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
chore/add-team-label-workflow
Draft

ci: add team label workflow#9477
amitabh94 wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
chore/add-team-label-workflow

Conversation

@amitabh94

@amitabh94 amitabh94 commented Jul 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Explanation

metamask-core is the only one of the three major MetaMask client-adjacent repos without automated PR team-labeling — metamask-mobile and metamask-extension both run add-team-label.yml on every PR open, applying a team-* label based on the author's entry in MetaMask/MetaMask-planning's topology.json. In core, no PR has ever been labeled automatically; any team-* label present today was applied manually by whoever happened to remember, and that's sparse and inconsistent across every team in this repo, not specific to any one package.

This adds the same workflow already proven in production in mobile/extension, closing that gap repo-wide.

Benefits:

  • Consistent, automatic team attribution on PRs across all core packages, matching the already-proven pattern in mobile/extension.
  • Enables reliable team-scoped GitHub/Slack filters (+label:team-x) for any team working in this repo.
  • Removes reliance on manual labeling discipline, which today is inconsistent across the board.

Scope note (why this is a draft): this workflow runs on every PR opened in core, for any author, so it's a repo-wide behavior change rather than something scoped to a single team's packages. It's also worth noting the underlying add-team-label action currently fails the CI check (exit 1) for any author not registered in topology.json (e.g. external contributors, new hires, bots) — that failure mode should be understood and accepted by whoever owns core's CI before this merges, since it will surface on PRs from every team, not just one.

Blocked (2026-07-11): token-exchange access policy. The "Get planning token" step currently fails:

Error: Token exchange failed: 403 Forbidden – {"status":"fail","message":"Access denied by policy for MetaMask/core to target MetaMask/MetaMask-planning"}

The token-exchange service's access policy doesn't yet allow MetaMask/core to request a token scoped to MetaMask/MetaMask-planning (needed to read topology.json), even though metamask-mobile and metamask-extension are already allowed. This requires an allowlist change on the policy side by whoever administers it — not a change to this workflow file. No existing tracked ticket for this was found; one likely needs to be filed against whatever repo/team owns that policy config before this can go green.

References

Checklist

  • No runtime code changes — CI workflow addition only, copied from repos where it's already in production use
  • Needs sign-off from core repo/CI owners given the repo-wide labeling impact (see scope note above)
  • Blocked on token-exchange policy allowlisting MetaMask/coreMetaMask/MetaMask-planning (see error above)

Mirrors the add-team-label.yml workflow already used in
metamask-mobile and metamask-extension, so PRs opened by
money-movement team members get team-money-movement applied
automatically instead of relying on manual labeling.
@amitabh94 amitabh94 requested a review from a team as a code owner July 11, 2026 19:25
@amitabh94 amitabh94 deployed to default-branch July 11, 2026 19:25 — with GitHub Actions Active
@amitabh94 amitabh94 marked this pull request as draft July 11, 2026 19:26
@amitabh94 amitabh94 changed the title ci: add team label workflow for money-movement ci: add team label workflow (already used in mobile/extension) Jul 11, 2026
@amitabh94 amitabh94 changed the title ci: add team label workflow (already used in mobile/extension) ci: add team label workflow Jul 11, 2026
@amitabh94 amitabh94 changed the title ci: add team label workflow ci: add team label workflow (already used in mobile/extension) Jul 11, 2026
@amitabh94 amitabh94 changed the title ci: add team label workflow (already used in mobile/extension) ci: add team label workflow Jul 11, 2026
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.

1 participant