Skip to content
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 GitHub action to enforce do not merge label #8536

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

hendrikmakait
Copy link
Member

@hendrikmakait hendrikmakait commented Feb 27, 2024

We have the convention not to merge PRs flagged with DNM in the title. This PR makes this convention explicit by prohibiting merges of PRs that are labeled with the new do not merge label.

As an aside: We may want to add a repository for shared actions between multiple repositories to avoid copy+pasting code (https://bgenc.net/2023.02.18.github-actions-do-not-merge-label/).

@hendrikmakait hendrikmakait added the do not merge Do not merge this PR until the label is removed label Feb 27, 2024
@hendrikmakait
Copy link
Member Author

To enforce the new action, we will have to require this workflow in the branch protection rule.

@hendrikmakait hendrikmakait removed the do not merge Do not merge this PR until the label is removed label Feb 27, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

Unit Test Results

See test report for an extended history of previous test failures. This is useful for diagnosing flaky tests.

    27 files  ± 0      27 suites  ±0   10h 18m 47s ⏱️ + 25m 29s
 3 996 tests ± 0   3 883 ✅  -  1    110 💤 ±0  3 ❌ +1 
50 254 runs  +18  47 956 ✅ +25  2 295 💤  - 6  3 ❌  - 1 

For more details on these failures, see this check.

Results for commit a4ff845. ± Comparison against base commit cbf939c.

@fjetter
Copy link
Member

fjetter commented Feb 27, 2024

Did anything happen that we now require this kind of protection rule?

@hendrikmakait
Copy link
Member Author

Did anything happen that we now require this kind of protection rule?

Not yet, but I'd like to keep it that way. I find just having DNM in the title unreliable and default to keeping DNM PRs in draft, but that signals that they're not ready for review. I figured it's a pretty low-effort change that makes things a bit nicer.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants