fix(monorepo): remove package scope before matching merged PR

[erezrokah]

• Make sure to open an issue as a bug/issue before writing your code! That way we can discuss the change, evaluate designs, and agree on the general idea
• Ensure the tests and linter pass
• Code coverage does not decrease (if any source code was changed)
• Appropriate docs were updated (if necessary)

Fixes #668 🦕

This is an attempt to reduce the scope of #669 to make it easier to review and publish a fix to a blocking bug (happy to close this one if #669 is close to being merged).
I think we should be able to add the logic to infer packageName in another PR (for me the priority for that fix is lower as there is a workaround of specifying it).

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #678 (33e8dc1) into master (243d6d9) will increase coverage by 0.05%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #678      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   84.13%   84.19%   +0.05%     
==========================================
  Files          45       46       +1     
  Lines        5277     5295      +18     
  Branches      437      438       +1     
==========================================
+ Hits         4440     4458      +18     
  Misses        836      836              
  Partials        1        1              

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/github.ts	83.02% <100.00%> (+0.01%)	⬆️
src/release-pr.ts	89.09% <100.00%> (-0.10%)	⬇️
src/util/branch-prefix.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 243d6d9...33e8dc1. Read the comment docs.

[bcoe]

@erezrokah just reached out to @joeldodge79, I'd like to try to get #669 merged and tested ASAP; so if it would solve the same set of issues for you, perhaps we can run with it?

Let's keep this open until that time?

[erezrokah]

@erezrokah just reached out to @joeldodge79, I'd like to try to get #669 merged and tested ASAP; so if it would solve the same set of issues for you, perhaps we can run with it?

Let's keep this open until that time?

Of course, completely agree with whatever you think is the best way to move forward

[erezrokah]

Closing in favor of #669