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

Automatically create "needs backport to" label when maintenance branch created. #174

Merged
merged 5 commits into from Jun 21, 2019

Conversation

@Mariatta
Copy link
Member

@Mariatta Mariatta commented Jun 4, 2019

Creating label is boring. With this PR, bedevere will automatically
create the needs backport to label when a maintenance branch
is created under CPython repo.

Maintenance branch has the pattern: 3.9, 4.0, 3.10, ...

  • enable the Branch or Tag creation webhook in CPython.
…h created.

Creating label is boring. With this PR, bedevere will automatically
create the `needs backport to ` label when a maintenance branch
is created under CPython repo.

Maintenance branch has the pattern: 3.9, 4.0, 3.10, ...
@codecov
Copy link

@codecov codecov bot commented Jun 4, 2019

Codecov Report

Merging #174 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is 100%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@          Coverage Diff          @@
##           master   #174   +/-   ##
=====================================
  Coverage     100%   100%           
=====================================
  Files          20     20           
  Lines        1534   1557   +23     
  Branches       86     87    +1     
=====================================
+ Hits         1534   1557   +23
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
bedevere/backport.py 100% <100%> (ø) ⬆️
tests/test_backport.py 100% <100%> (ø) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 5103b98...272f337. Read the comment docs.

@bsipocz
Copy link

@bsipocz bsipocz commented Jun 4, 2019

👋 @Mariatta - I'm sure your procedures are very much different than ours (we don't use bots to backport, but do everything manually (technically)). Rather we use a bunch of scripts that generates a copy paste-able list to cherry-pick/backport.

Maybe some of the logic can be reused:
https://github.com/astropy/astropy-procedures/tree/master/pr_consistency

@@ -346,3 +346,32 @@ def __init__(self, *, getitem=None, delete=None, post=None):
gh = FakeGH(getitem=getitem)
await backport.router.dispatch(event, gh)
assert len(gh.post_) == 0


@pytest.mark.parametrize('ref', ['3.9', '4.0', '3.10'])
Copy link
Member

@terryjreedy terryjreedy Jun 5, 2019

There is no current plan for 4.0, certainly not 4.0 and 3.10. I believe a majority agreed on 3.10 instead of 4.0, but a few seem to support 4.0 rather than 3.10. We probably should revisit this soon.

Copy link
Member Author

@Mariatta Mariatta Jun 5, 2019

4.0 is still a valid test case.

@Mariatta
Copy link
Member Author

@Mariatta Mariatta commented Jun 9, 2019

PR updated. It will also create an issue in https://github.com/berkerpeksag/cpython-emailer-webhook/ to remind people about adding the new maintenance branch to the list of ALLOWED_BRANCHES

bedevere/backport.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
bedevere/backport.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Mariatta and others added 3 commits Jun 21, 2019
Co-Authored-By: Brett Cannon <54418+brettcannon@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-Authored-By: Brett Cannon <54418+brettcannon@users.noreply.github.com>
@Mariatta Mariatta merged commit 6147b3f into master Jun 21, 2019
4 checks passed
@Mariatta Mariatta deleted the auto-create-backport-label branch Jun 21, 2019
@Mariatta
Copy link
Member Author

@Mariatta Mariatta commented Jun 21, 2019

I've enabled the Branch of tag creation webhook in CPython's repo.

@Mariatta
Copy link
Member Author

@Mariatta Mariatta commented Jun 21, 2019

Thanks!

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants