[Python-Dev] GH-NNNN vs #NNNN in merge commit (original) (raw)
Barry Warsaw barry at python.org
Thu Jan 25 16:46:38 EST 2018
- Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] GH-NNNN vs #NNNN in merge commit
- Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] GH-NNNN vs #NNNN in merge commit
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Jan 25, 2018, at 13:38, Mariatta Wijaya <mariatta.wijaya at gmail.com> wrote:
+1 for the mergebot! :)
Yes, +1 from me too. As you know, GitLab has the option to “merge when CI completes successfully” and it’s a great workflow. Once I’ve reviewed and approved the branch, I can hit this button and… we’re done! Assuming of course that no additional commits get pushed (that’s actually configurable I think), and that CI doesn’t fail. I’d be very happy to see how close we can get to that with GitHub and a mergebot.
I don’t know that we need a @mergebot mention though. Why not just auto merge if the PR is approved, CI is all green, and no additional commits have been pushed? I suppose the reason would be because in GH, you can’t modify the commit message any other way pre-merge.
-Barry
-------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 833 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20180125/eeabdc56/attachment.sig>
- Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] GH-NNNN vs #NNNN in merge commit
- Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] GH-NNNN vs #NNNN in merge commit
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]