Make coala a GitHub App

[li-boxuan]

See https://github.com/marketplace/category/code-quality

I guess coala would be much more popular if it can be made a GitHub App.

This means coala needs to be run as a web service, deployed somewhere like Heroku (but it's not totally free hmmm....)

GitMate + coala actually do the same thing, but that means developers need to learn both GitMate and coala, and GitMate requires admin access, which sounds a bit risky to developers (that's because GitMate has other functionalities, but coala does not need that high-level permission).

[budukhyash]

@li-boxuan Sir I would love to work on this project.

[li-boxuan]

@budukhyash Consider writing your ideas/thoughts on this (by leaving comments on this thread) and ask people to review/discuss, so we have a better idea of whether this is viable and worthwhile.

[budukhyash]

@li-boxuan I searched about github apps and integrations.I found out a nodejs based framework called as probot.I went through the probot docs and created a test github app. I have a few doubts regarding the coala app.

• Gitmate does provide static code analysis and other functionalities and due to which it needs high level permissions.So we are looking to develop a coala app similar to the gitmate in terms of code analysis
  which does not require high level permissions.Correct ?

• coala is interactive in nature.So should the coala app must take input from the users in the form of comments and apply the patch ?

[budukhyash]

@jayvdb Hello sir can you please review this.

[ksdme]

Related to #702

@li-boxuan IIRC we have a docker based coala image, building one click installers for a couple of popular cloud services (Heroku, AWS, GC) would be a good first step.

[jayvdb]

GitMate requires admin access, which sounds a bit risky to developers ...

This is an interesting problem, and should be solvable within GitMate, allowing a non-admin install into an org / repo.

Disabling GitMate features/plugins which are not possible based on the permissions given to GitMate would be in scope.

Another direction to follow is GitMate build process emitting a 'coala-only' mode installer.

Also we do have a hosted version of coala inside the deployed coala webservices (fully functional, exposed via an API) , and inside the deployed corobo (not exposed). Either of those could be the basis of a github app, but both require some work to get operational again.

[frextrite]

Also we do have a hosted version of coala inside the deployed coala webservices (fully functional, exposed via an API)

Which deployed web service are we talking about here?

Another direction to follow is GitMate build process emitting a 'coala-only' mode installer.

What is meant by 'coala-only' mode? Could you explain this a bit more?

[sladyn98]

@frextrite https://webservices.coala.io/ have a look here.
@jayvdb

Another direction to follow is GitMate build process emitting a 'coala-only' mode installer.

Are we talking about a coala type gitmate clone, because we could make a separate gitmate-style coala app, which would not require high level permissions and deploy it on a webservice.The API's for the webservice could be used as a start.We could follow a MVC based django model.

[AkshJain99]

@li-boxuan are you going to mentor this project this year?

[li-boxuan]

@AkshJain99 Nope, and I am not even sure if this is suitable for a GSoC project. I open up the issue just because I find it's an interesting open problem.

[AkshJain99]

okay @li-boxuan