Add Check suite + check run events

[AlistairB]

Very work in progress. I prefer to create the PR early as I work so I can add notes as I go. I'll clean up the git history when I am done. Ready for review.

Notes

• https://developer.github.com/v3/activity/events/types/#checksuiteevent does not mention a status of queued, however this is the status I see in an example event hitting the app I am working on.
• app is also coming through. I can't find any reference for this so I'm inclined to ignore it for now.

Issue reference:
Closes #25

Submission Checklist:

• Have you followed the guidelines in our Contributing document (for example, is your tree a clean merge)?
• Have you checked to ensure there aren't other open Pull Requests for the same update/change?
• Does your submission build?
• Does your submission pass tests?
• Have you run lints on your code locally prior to submission? I see no lints related to my additions.
• Have you updated all of the cabal/nix infrastructure? N/A
• Is this a breaking change? Have you discussed this? Not breaking. Only adding new things
• Add documentation for new types.

[kvanbere]

Thanks, I'm watching this.

[AlistairB]

@donkeybonks I've been going down the path of creating BlahSimple data types for where the event payload does not match those already existing. However, it seems that many are subtly different that this feels a bit unwieldy.

Specifically CheckSuiteEvent requires different versions of:

• HookCommit - The url is not included (in head_commit).
• HookInstallation - Only the id is included.
• HookPullRequest - A much smaller set.
• PullRequestTarget - User and label not included.
• HookRepository - A very simple version.

I can see some similarity between the representation of CheckSuiteEvent and CheckRunEvent. I think instead I will create HookChecksPullRequest and so on instead. Does that sound reasonable?

[kvanbere]

Nevermind the last comment, your latest commit addresses it perfectly.

[AlistairB]

@donkeybonks I'm pretty happy with this so far for CheckSuiteEvent. I'm going to proceed with adding CheckRunEvent (I prefer these in the same PR as check run may require tweaks to the shared checks data types).

Currently the check suite test for GHC 7.8 is failing with but got: Left "when expecting a Integral, encountered String instead". I'm struggling to pinpoint the issue. I don't suppose you have seen these failures on 7.8 before? I'm guessing it is due to a bug in an old version of aeson.

[kvanbere]

If the failures are the same or less than the test suite currently (there are currently a few accepted failures), then it is fine.

However, as I understand it, there are a few people using this package with GHC-7.8 in a commercial setting, hence my stubbornness to continue supporting it and not drop it in a hope that they eventually swap back to HEAD from their fork.

[AlistairB]

@donkeybonks No it does appear that it is specifically failing on the DecodeEvents can decode CheckSuiteEvent test only for GHC 7.8 and is not an accepted failure. No worries, I'll see if I can figure out what it is failing on.

[AlistairB]

Hi @donkeybonks , I think this should be good now. Did you want to me to squash it into a single commit?

While I'm here, are you doing haskell in Melbourne? 😄 I'm Melbourne based. Always curious to hear about companies in Melbourne doing haskell.

[kvanbere]

Hi, yes please, squash it and we'll review it all together :)

I actually write firmware for electric trucks at a startup in South Dandenong (https://sea-electric.com), but I don't use Haskell at work. I noticed there's a clothing brand in Brighton that's hiring a senior Haskell technical lead, but unfortunately that's not me!

I didn't quite manage to take @onrock-eng quite off the ground contracting on Haskell alone - these days still taking mostly JS/CSS jobs, and still only on the side, although it's getting there.

[AlistairB]

Done. Ah fair enough. Best of luck with it. I'm also trying my hand at a Haskell startup.

[kvanbere]

Perfect.

[kvanbere]

Did you want to add yourself to AUTHORS, package.yaml and then rebuild the cabal file as well?

[kvanbere]

Or I can merge this and you can do that as a separate PR if you’d like.

[AlistairB]

Sure thanks! I pushed as a separate commit. Can squash it with the other commit if you need.

[kvanbere]

Thank you! Merged with pleasure

[kvanbere]

Once I get an opportunity tomorrow evening, I will update the changelog, bump the version and if all goes well and all the CI are still happy, release this to Hackage.