Chore: enable branch protection eclipse-tractusx.github.io main branch

[FaGru3n]

Description

• enable branch protection for eclipse-tractusx.github.io main branch
• approval 2 committers needed

fixes eclipse-tractusx/eclipse-tractusx.github.io#515

FYI:
@stephanbcbauer @mhellmeier @Siegfriedk @danielmiehle

Pre-review checks

Please ensure to do as many of the following checks as possible, before asking for committer review:

• DEPENDENCIES are up-to-date. Dash license tool. Committers can open IP issues for restricted libs.
• Copyright and license header are present on all affected files

[FaGru3n]

@eclipse-tractusx/eclipsefdn-security will this modified for the hole org?

just want to enable this for eclipse-tractusx.github.io

Organization eclipse-tractusx[id=eclipse-tractusx]
--- original
+++ canonical
@@ -163,6 +163,7 @@
branch_protection_rules: [
orgs.newBranchProtectionRule('main') {
dismisses_stale_reviews: true

•    required_approving_review_count: 2
     }
  

[SebastianBezold]

I think 2 reviews should be fine.
Our Code Reviews sections proposes a two step approach anyways. A "business" review and another one from a committer, that is anyway needed.

[mhellmeier]

I would highly vote for 1 required approving reviewer. 2 would be very hard for small teams. But maybe we can recommend 2 reviewers (in a TRG?) but enforce 1 reviewer.

[carslen]

As this PR is not introduceing branch protection and required review count to the GH Org but to the eclipse-tractusx/eclipse-tractusx.github.io repo only, I would like to require 2 reviewers. For this repository enough stakeholders should be available doing reviews.

Maybe we should also think about to introcude .github/CODEOWNERS (for eclipse-tractusx/eclipse-tractusx.github.io). Code owners are automatically assigned to new PRs:
https://docs.github.com/en/repositories/managing-your-repositorys-settings-and-features/customizing-your-repository/about-code-owners

[mhellmeier]

I think the idea of a .github/CODEOWNERS file would be pretty useful. This would also solve the problem of Issues and PRs not associated. We could divide it for every section (like KIT etc.).

[netomi]

@eclipse-tractusx/eclipsefdn-security will this modified for the hole org?

no, the setting will only be used for the repo you defined it for, see also the summary:

btw. a required_approving_review_count of 2 is the default, so you dont have to specify it, unless you want to set it to a different value.

btw. other projects defined some custom branch protection rules that can then be easily applied for a repo like that:

https://github.com/eclipse-set/.eclipsefdn/blob/main/otterdog/eclipse-set.jsonnet#L3

Maybe of interest for tractus-x as well.

[FaGru3n]

I think 2 reviews should be fine. Our Code Reviews sections proposes a two step approach anyways. A "business" review and another one from a committer, that is anyway needed.

that was my intention 1 vote from "business" and 1 from a committer

after reading the discussion with @carslen and @mhellmeier @SebastianBezold

we have:

• 3 committer (included vote from myside ) for 2 reviewer
• 2 committer for 1 reviewer (@mhellmeier and @paullatzelsperger )
• 1 committer for non review (@borisrizov-zf)

and with the hint from @netomi i would clear this section that we can use the default setting for branch protection.

Think will wait for a project lead vote, because of the idea with "business" votes.. 😃

@ participants, thanks for your feedback.

[Siegfriedk]

@FaGru3n lets do it. it will also be very good for proper coop

[stephanbcbauer]

@FaGru3n sounds good. Thumbs up

[github-actions]

Diff for b500deb:

Printing local diff for configuration at '/home/runner/work/.eclipsefdn/.eclipsefdn/otterdog-configs/otterdog.json'

Actions are indicated with the following symbols:
+   create
!   modify
!   forced update
-   delete

Organization eclipse-tractusx[id=eclipse-tractusx]
  there have been 41 validation infos, enable verbose output with '-v' to to display them.

+   add branch_protection_rule[pattern="main", repository="eclipse-tractusx.github.io"] {
+     allows_deletions                                         = false
+     allows_force_pushes                                      = false
+     blocks_creations                                         = false
+     bypass_force_push_allowances                             = []
+     bypass_pull_request_allowances                           = []
+     dismisses_stale_reviews                                  = true
+     is_admin_enforced                                        = false
+     lock_allows_fetch_and_merge                              = false
+     lock_branch                                              = false
+     pattern                                                  = "main"
+     require_last_push_approval                               = false
+     required_approving_review_count                          = "2"
+     required_status_checks                                   = [
+       "eclipse-eca-validation:eclipsefdn/eca"
+     ],
+     requires_code_owner_reviews                              = false
+     requires_commit_signatures                               = false
+     requires_conversation_resolution                         = false
+     requires_deployments                                     = false
+     requires_linear_history                                  = false
+     requires_pull_request                                    = true
+     requires_status_checks                                   = true
+     requires_strict_status_checks                            = false
+     restricts_pushes                                         = false
+     restricts_review_dismissals                              = false
+   }
  
  Plan: 1 to add, 0 to change, 0 to delete.

Showing diff to a canonical version of the configuration at '/home/runner/work/.eclipsefdn/.eclipsefdn/otterdog-configs/otterdog.json'

Organization eclipse-tractusx[id=eclipse-tractusx]

[FaGru3n]

FYI:

• required_approving_review_count                          = "2"
  

[FaGru3n]

we have:

• 7 committer ( @Siegfriedk @stephanbcbauer @carslen @SebastianBezold @Phil91 @evegufy included vote from myside ) for 2 reviewer
• 2 committer for 1 reviewer (@mhellmeier and @paullatzelsperger )
• 1 committer for non review (@borisrizov-zf)

[netomi]

let me know when you have agreed on a number of approvals.
Most projects use 1, which I find reasonable to assure that reviews are made, but progress is not blocked by having to chase reviewers to approve.

[Phil91]

@FaGru3n we might set it to 1 for other repos, but for this repo i think 2 reviewers are fine 👍

[netomi]

Looks like this has been stabilized, lets get this merged, you can easily change if needed ofc.

[netomi]

change is live.