Folk can't argue with robots: I think its useful to have an escape valve for dealing with spurious failures - the Python Core team is pretty responsible, and I think we should permit bypassing robots, at least until we have lots of run-time to learn about any flakiness present.
-Rob On 16 June 2016 at 22:08, Donald Stufft <don...@stufft.io> wrote: > >> On Jun 16, 2016, at 1:38 AM, Barry Warsaw <ba...@python.org> wrote: >> >> On Jun 15, 2016, at 06:59 PM, Donald Stufft wrote: >> >>> Currently there’s nothing preventing people from pushing directly to >>> the PEP repository, in https://github.com/python/peps/issues/5 there’s >>> talk of setting up Travis to ensure the PEPs are always building and >>> if the flag is set to require a +1 from Travis, then all changes will >>> need to go through PRs. >> >> Yes, I agree that's where we want to end up. It might make sense to >> allow PEP editors to push directly for $reasons, but I don't know if >> that's possible. > > If we want to give a group of people the ability to override the status check > we just need to give that group of people Administrator access to the > repository > so we could add a “PEP Editors” group if we didn’t want to give the entire > Python Core team such permission. > > I’m unsure if that means that they can push directly or not, or if that > only means they can merge a PR that doesn’t have the requisite passing status > checks. > > — > Donald Stufft > > > > _______________________________________________ > python-committers mailing list > python-committers@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers > Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/ _______________________________________________ python-committers mailing list python-committers@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
