On 25 February 2017 at 10:17, Brett Cannon <br...@python.org> wrote: > Two things. One, has someone verified that if a core dev edits a PR that > the squash commit still gives the PR creator the author credit in the git > metadata? I remember doing an edit like this once and GitHub didn't show > any author credit in the web UI because I assume GitHub refused to guess > who the author credit should go to. So if someone could test this in a > checkout that would be great as that means https://github.com/ > python/core-workflow/issues/7 can be easily solved and we can automate > Misc/ACKS. > > Two, we are going to review the new workflow in two weeks after having > been using it for a month (I can't believe it's only been two weeks since > the migration!). Since the sign-off requirement has generated the most > discussion, what I will do is swap the requirement for PR merging to be no > required review but to require all-green status checks (in a previous email > Donald alluded to the fact that I thought self-approval would be possible > in "emergencies" but that obviously doesn't hold). This will give us > basically 2 weeks with both approaches when we review the process so we can > make an informed decision. >
Thanks, the new setup where Travis is required and codecov is advisory is looking pretty good to me so far (I just accepted a PR with bad codecov stats as the branches it was complaining lacked coverage will only trigger on Mac OS X). Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
_______________________________________________ core-workflow mailing list core-workflow@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/core-workflow This list is governed by the PSF Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct
