[core-workflow] self-approving pull requests

[Nick Coghlan]

On 25 February 2017 at 10:17, Brett Cannon <brett at 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   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/core-workflow/attachments/20170225/77b4407d/attachment.html>