-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13
Switch nixpkgs to branch protection rulesets #124
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
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thank you! I've reviewed this and can confirm that this should match the status quo!
Since I'm pretty sure we can run both rulesets and branch protections simultaneously, I'll go ahead and import these right now (while doing another sanity check before saving). I'll update the PR with the exported ones then.
After that, let's do a brief check before getting another approval from an org admin to turn off branch protections.
@wolfgangwalther The only notable difference after importing is this. Do you know what that's about? |
Hrhr... Edit: To clarify, because the name is misleading, it's this setting:
(you can see the id via devtools) |
Ah I see, there's no additional settings for organisations! I invited you to my https://github.com/orgs/Infinisil-s-Test-Organization in case you want to mess around with org settings and don't want to create your own test org. |
Of course, that makes sense. Maybe not because it's in an organization, but because the original is not a fork, so the setting doesn't make sense. |
I added a simple README to the The latter is also an argument why to keep the exports checked into the repo. The rules might be visible for everyone through the branches tab in the repos, but this does not contain the bypassing actors. |
0041a06
to
e185e3a
Compare
e185e3a
to
2c574e2
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
nice, thanks for helping make the project more transparent
I think we can do that now. Once this is merged, I can create PRs to propose actual changes to the branch protection rules. |
Deleted the branch protections now, so we only rely on rulesets now! |
This PR is not necessarily intended to be merged*. It targets #120, but discussing code in a Pull Request is easier than in an issue. Those files are supposed to be imported into the nixpkgs branch protection rulesets section.
Those files have been created in my fork and were then exported. The only modification I made manually is in the
bypass_actors
section. Since I can't have any teams in my personal fork, I added those manually. Hopefully that works, it should according to API docs etc.The Team ID's can be verified with:
The general structure is different compared to the classic branch protection rules, because the features are slightly different. The new rulesets can only define bypassers for the whole ruleset, not for some of the rules in it. Thus, the different rules must be separated to replicate the status-quo.
AFAICT, this should replicate the status-quo exactly. Of course, careful review is required.
@infinisil
*If, however, we want to document those rules here, then they should be re-exported after import.