Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Use pr base branch to configure editorial workflow for different environments (stage/production) #412

Closed
rewop opened this issue May 8, 2017 · 3 comments · Fixed by #1155

Comments

@rewop
Copy link

rewop commented May 8, 2017

I have been looking at how to configure the cms for different environments develop -> stage -> production.

What I would like to achieve is to have a dedicated repository that will contains the contents. This repository will contain long living branches per environment (master/stage/develop).

At build time I will have a script that builds the yaml configuration assigning the right branch per environment.

However this configuration wouldn't work with editorial workflow.

I noticed that when retrieving unpublished contents to render the editorial workfloe, the api only looks at the branch names. However when we retrieve the PRs, we could filter by base by using the configuration. This way we can separate editorial workflows per environments.

I may be missing something, but I wonder if this approach would work.

Would this be a right implementation? If so, I will be happy to contribute on it.

@calavera
Copy link
Contributor

calavera commented May 8, 2017

That's a very interesting idea. If I understand it correctly, you want to show only PRs with a specific base branch in the editorial workflow, is this correct? I think your approach can work if that's the idea. Feel free to open a PR so we can play with the code.

@rewop
Copy link
Author

rewop commented May 9, 2017

@calavera Yes that is what I mean. I see that the branch in the config is not used to filter the PRs for the editorial workflow. I will try to open a PR asap for this one.

@erquhart
Copy link
Contributor

erquhart commented Jan 3, 2018

Hmm I'd even say this is a bug - we should be checking the base branch for editorial workflow entries.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants