Automation/blog pipeline#718
Conversation
…pdate info from csv, including downloading the blog image
| with: | ||
| token: ${{ secrets.GHA_ACTIONS_ALLOW_TOKEN }} | ||
| commit-message: "Automated import of reviewed blog posts" | ||
| branch: "automation/import-blog" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The branch name is fixed as automation/import-blog, which means all batch imports accumulate into the same PR. If a previous batch PR is still open when a new daily run triggers, reviewers might approve a larger bundle than expected.\n\nWould it be worth using a date-stamped branch name (e.g. automation/import-blog-2026-06-28) so each run creates its own isolated PR, giving reviewers clearer control over what they're approving?
| - new posts under `_posts/` | ||
| - cover images under `assets/images/blog/` | ||
|
|
||
| The spreadsheet's `isPublished` column has already been set to TRUE for |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The PR body already mentions that isPublished is set to TRUE before merging, which is good. One concern: if this PR is rejected or closed without merging, those rows stay marked as published in the sheet and won't be re-exported on the next run — they'd be silently lost.\n\nCould we add a note here reminding reviewers that closing this PR without merging requires manually resetting isPublished to FALSE in the spreadsheet for the affected rows?
| team-reviewers: "Women-Coding-Community/leaders" | ||
| title: "Automated import of reviewed blog posts" | ||
| body: | | ||
| This PR was created automatically by a GitHub Action. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The PR checklist includes "I have added a screenshot from the website after I tested it locally" but no screenshot appears in the PR body. Since this automation writes files and opens PRs, a sample of the generated post output (e.g. the front matter + first few lines of an exported .html file) would help reviewers validate the format before merging.
| Use this ID in your scripts when exporting the document. | ||
|
|
||
| ## Run Automation | ||
| ## Export a single blog manually (for testing) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The README now correctly references blog_exporter.py as the entry point for manual testing, but doc_to_html_conversion.py is still present in the repo (visible in the file tree). Is this file still needed, or should it be removed/deprecated to avoid confusion about which script to use?
3 participants
A daily (and manually-triggerable) GitHub Action that turns reviewed blog submissions into draft PRs.
The initial PR was opened before by Silke, I improved it.
What it does
isReviewedandApprovedbut not yetisPublishedisPublished=TRUEback to the sheet so nothing is published twice — the sheet is the single source of truthKey changes
publish_reviewed_blogs.py— orchestrator;blog_exporter.py— Doc→post + image;blog_info_from_spreadsheet.py— sheet read/writebleach); filename slugs and YAML front matter hardenedIt was tested locally, it is not possible to test when it is in PR only when merged.
Pull request checklist
Please check if your PR fulfills the following requirements: