-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 500
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Auto-merge Backport PRs in documentation-website repo #6400
Comments
Transferring to documentation repo. |
@rishabh6788 will discuss with @Naarcha-AWS to understand the requirements. CC: @hdhalter |
Have discussion with @Naarcha-AWS offline and will take a look with auto approval before auto merging. Thanks. |
Will remove these:
|
The github settings of automerge is more on specific PR not on all PRs matching a condition: |
We'd also like to receive some kind of notification if there is a merge conflict on the backport PR. |
That notification will appear if the status checks don't complete, I believe. |
Will need to tweak the backport workflow source code to add a label, or find the PR number and use gh to add a label through workflow files. |
New backport automerge: |
This is completed now for docs team. Thanks. |
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe
The Backport tool, while efficient, can occasionally cause friction when a maintainer forgets to merge a PR. Furthermore, the documentation-website repo currently requires that all PRs be "approved", including Backports, which means that maintainers need to take an extra-step to merge a Backport PR even when that PR has passed all checks.
Describe the solution you'd like
Describe alternatives you've considered
We've considered turning on the auto-merge feature for all PRs. However, the quality-control process for documentation PRs prevents us from auto-merging PRs to the
main
branch, since all PRs must not only pass code-review, but also editorial review. This means that, even though a PR may technically pass GitHub's and organizations requirements for merging, it might not pass the documentation teams quality requirements.Additional context
For additional information, see #6305
More changes on other repos for the similar implementation:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: