Merge PRs instead of closing

[heaths]

It's a bit disconcerting to see PRs closed as unmerged when, in fact, they were merged. Compare with a PR that was just merged successfully to Homebrew/brew coincidentally:

Couldn't the workflow update the files with bottle info in the PR then merge the PR?

[p-linnane]

You're pushing commits directly to your main branch, which is why these are being closed rather than merged.

[MikeMcQuaid]

brew test-bot doesn't perform merges so has no ability to influence this, sorry.

[heaths]

I appreciate that's how it works. I'm suggesting/asking why it can't update files in its merge branch and initiate a merge instead? It's technically possible - I've used workflows like that in the past - but can appreciate if that's not desirable. Considering how branch rulesets might be set up, this seems like the safer bet anyway. main might be blocked from direct merges and isntead have to go through pull requests.

[p-linnane]

You may be interested in checking out our automerge workflows: https://github.com/Homebrew/homebrew-core/tree/master/.github/workflows

[Bo98]

The way it pushes is adjusted in your own workflows rather than test-bot: https://github.com/heaths/homebrew-tap/blob/main/.github/workflows/publish.yml#L31. You can make it push to the PR and enable automerge though you may need to do a couple extra things depending on your setup such as:

• Having some mechanism that skips the build and on that push (e.g. a label)
• Secure automerging after the push (optional)
• It may require extra PAT setup to trigger CI (should you have required CI)

[heaths]

Thanks. I was planning on making some changes to the initial files anyway - like effectively combinging both workflows but the release.yml workflow (as it is now) would go through a deployment so I don't have to wait manually. This weekend was mainly just trying to get my forumula to compile on linux. I can switch branches and make appropriate changes; however, this feature ask was more so to see if there was interest in changing the default workflows that brew tap-new creates. Cool if not (which seems to be the case). I appreciate the pointers, though!

[MikeMcQuaid]

however, this feature ask was more so to see if there was interest in changing the default workflows that brew tap-new creates. Cool if not (which seems to be the case). I appreciate the pointers, though!

Happy to review a PR for this.