Duplicated issues

I’m getting a lot of duplicated issues created, what are the criteria for checking if an issue exist?

I’m not editing the todos but of course the line numbers will change all the time and also filenames will change.

example

what? we have to sign in if user have signed in with vipps before!

devent/apps/devent-services/src/app/app.service.ts

Line 70 in 18e42f0

 // TODO: what? we have to sign in if user have signed in with vipps before! 

what? we have to sign in if user have signed in with vipps before!

devent/apps/devent-services/src/app/app.service.ts

Line 70 in 98b1716

 // TODO: what? we have to sign in if user have signed in with vipps before! 

[alstr]

I’ve added an enhanced check for duplicate issues in the new release, v4.0.2. Hopefully that helps a bit. Long term I would like to improve how the action handles rebasing so it’s not having to rely on this. Prevention rather than cure.

[Aniwax]

Hi @alstr , I created this repo https://github.com/Aniwax/test_repo_todo_toisse to try to reproduce the problem. I did the following step:

1. Commit a REAME on main branch.
2. Put some generic code on main branch and a TODO (1st) in this file. Also include the workflow file. [After this commit, this TODO is recognised],
3. I started a new branch add_more_functionalities. Went into the generic_code.py file. Added 2 lines of code and a new TODO (2nd). [However, this TODO is not picked up to become issue.]
4. I went back to the main branch, created another file and a new TODO (3rd). [This TODO became an Issue after push.]
5. Rebase the add_more_functionalities according to main. Nothing happened on the TODO side.
6. Merged add_more_functionalities to main through pull request, and only then the 2nd TODO became an Issue, after push.

You can check this in the repo history. However, this was not the behavior I had in my private code space. There, 2nd TODO would be picked up the first time, 3rd TODO would be duplicated after rebase, 2nd TODO would be duplicated after merge through pull request. However, this was the behavior in v2.0.5. I am not sure, if it still happens in the newest version.