Re: Policy proposal (draft): Don't push knowingly broken or work-in-progress work to dist git

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On 1/27/21 2:22 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 27. 01. 21 13:45, Petr Menšík wrote:
>> I think one reason against maintainer's pull requests is poor tooling to
>> work with them. Filled fedpkg proposal to include ability to fork and
>> add personal fork to current repository or add when cloning [1].
>> I think current way discourages its use, because too many manual steps
>> have to be done before making PR.
>>
>> 1. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1920997
>>
>> On 1/25/21 4:30 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
...
>>
>> Is there already way to configure maintainer's fork branch to auto merge
>> and production build, once CI finishes successfully?
>>
>> I think adding required steps into build process, where developer has to
>> watch for results and make manual steps is the problem. If I could just
>> push my change to my fork and let it autoprocess, I would use it when
>> not in hurry. But I demand first not involving multiple manual steps to
>> make production built from PR.
>>
>> Could there be way as a maintainer to add a comment [build] to merged
>> PR, and pagure would start a new build? I think it does not matter who
>> started the build, but whose changes are included.
>>
>> If I could just mark good looking changes and it would try to process
>> it, just notifying me whether successfully or not, I would use PR more
>> often. If I have to watch PR CI results myself and do manual steps
>> depending of its result, it discourages me. Would like some bot to do
>> that.
>>
>> There seems to be support for [citest] for retriggering CI on package.
>> Could something similar be used to autobuild PR of people with commit
>> rights on explicitly enabled branches?
> 
> Zuul can merge and build PRs automatically when CI passes.
> 
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Zuul-based-ci
> 

Great! Never heard of this.

It seems somehow clumsy to be configured just for personal forks, but it
seems it provides required features. Configuration seems more
complicated than I would like, but I will try to use it for some proof
of concept. Thanks for mentioning it.

-- 
Petr Menšík
Software Engineer
Red Hat, http://www.redhat.com/
email: pemensik@xxxxxxxxxx
PGP: DFCF908DB7C87E8E529925BC4931CA5B6C9FC5CB

Attachment: OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux