-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 482
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
✨ Add CODEOWNERS branch protection check #2057
✨ Add CODEOWNERS branch protection check #2057
Conversation
Codecov Report
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #2057 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 41.87% 44.72% +2.85%
==========================================
Files 95 95
Lines 7945 7977 +32
==========================================
+ Hits 3327 3568 +241
+ Misses 4358 4140 -218
- Partials 260 269 +9 |
Integration tests success for |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTm, looks great.
I think we just need to try to put the changes as part of an existing "level", see my comment.
Wdut?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks
Integration tests success for |
Integration tests success for |
Thank you for the help but I am done
…On Mon, Jul 18, 2022, 4:02 PM github-actions[bot] ***@***.***> wrote:
Integration tests success for
[245f3b7
<245f3b7>
]
(https://github.com/ossf/scorecard/actions/runs/2692949564)
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#2057 (comment)>, or
unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AYR7CC62TDKC67FD4XMBYSTVUWZ6XANCNFSM53TIO3IA>
.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message
ID: ***@***.***>
|
Integration tests success for |
Integration tests success for |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Docs look good to me, with a minor nit for formatting.
377be84
to
c14366b
Compare
Integration tests success for |
c14366b
to
9b6bbca
Compare
Integration tests success for |
9b6bbca
to
e223952
Compare
Integration tests success for |
@raghavkaul The linter check is failing. Could you please fix that? We should be able to merge after that. |
Stale pull request message |
@raghavkaul A friendly ping! |
Stale pull request message |
* Fix lint issues for `range` operator * Fix e2e test failure
Head branch was pushed to by a user without write access
e223952
to
8aa0938
Compare
4ea0772
to
9efddd5
Compare
Integration tests success for |
Integration tests success for |
Integration tests success for |
What kind of change does this PR introduce?
Enhance Branch-Protection check to require CODEOWNER review.
This adds 'bonus points' to the Branch-Protection check, but doesn't detract from the score if it's not enabled.
What is the current behavior?
Today, the Branch-Protection check requires that code review must be completed before merge. In GitHub, CODEOWNERS can be assigned to subpaths in a. Without CODEOWNER review, anyone with write access to the repo can approve any PR. In large repos with many modules and many maintainers, CODEOWNERS allows maintainers to delegate code reviews and limit the scope of approval.
What is the new behavior (if this is a feature change)?**
Added a unit test; updated existing unit tests.
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?