Since everyone who voiced an opinion agreed that the label is unnecessary, I will happily accept your offer to remove it from everything that's relevant, Mariatta. :)
On Fri, 12 May 2017 at 23:42 Mariatta Wijaya <mariatta.wij...@gmail.com> wrote: > OK then it seems like the there is no real need to apply `cherry-pick for > *` anymore? > > +1 from me for not having to apply `cherry-pick for *` label. > > I can update cherry_picker.py readme and the devguide, if we're all ok > with it :) > > what's probably more important is the backport PR >> title pattern of: >> [X.Y] <whatever> (GH-<PR number>) > > > Yes, cherry_picker.py does this for you :) > > In the devguide though, we've only instructed people to prefix it with > [X.Y], but did not mention about `GH-<PR number>`. I'll open an issue. > > Thanks :) > > > Mariatta Wijaya > > On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 7:17 PM, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 10 May 2017 at 03:23, Mariatta Wijaya <mariatta.wij...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > Right now I'm only using the cherry-pick labels to verify whether a >> backport >> > has been done or not, so then I can remove the `needs backport to` label >> > from the original PR. >> >> For that purpose, what's probably more important is the backport PR >> title pattern of: >> >> [X.Y] <whatever> (GH-<PR number>) >> >> The fact it's a cherry-pick is implied by the reference to the >> original PR (also indicated by the git cherry-pick message in the >> commit body), while the [X.Y] indicates which branch it's for. >> >> The labels are also going to convey strictly less information than >> that, since they won't indicate the original PR number or the >> cherry-picked commit hash. >> >> 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
