Conversation
Dry-run check results |
11472fe to
ccd8f31
Compare
|
Backup (taken automatically with https://github.com/marcoieni/multicheese in case you are curious!)
|
a4540e6 to
83f09a2
Compare
| protection.pattern, | ||
| ); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Unlike protection rules, multiple rulesets can apply at the same time, so you can be confident that every rule targeting a branch in your repository will be evaluated when someone interacts with that branch
I removed this because we need multiple rules to interact with the same branch (different bypass list for normal push and force push).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In that case we should make the name required when there are multiple identical patterns, because we used the pattern as an identifier.
6f35480 to
c3d0cbd
Compare
|
Here's how I tested the "stable" and "stable - force-pushes" rules.
The user in the |
6e4c63c to
c67ec1b
Compare
|
There's one issue: |
0dee3f1 to
f614447
Compare
|
We are relatively close to making the unrolled PRs by bors, instead of rustc-perf. If this can wait a few weeks, rust-timer will no longer need that access. |
f614447 to
dbe30bf
Compare
#2343 is a small change that can be reverted easily. Since this is the only blocker to have rulesets in the rust I'm in favor of creating the team. What do you think? 🤔 |
|
Sure, go ahead, it's a small change 👍 |
1b14c6d to
c62adff
Compare
| let bypass_actors = self.bypass_actors(expected_repo, branch_protection).await?; | ||
|
|
||
| Ok(construct_ruleset(branch_protection, bypass_actors)) | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this function is only two lines but I left it like this to minimize the git diff of the PR.
We could inline the construct_ruleset free function later
| bypass_mode: RulesetBypassMode::Always, | ||
| }) | ||
| }) | ||
| .collect(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this piece of code was moved up
c62adff to
8c81777
Compare
| bail!( | ||
| r#"repo '{}' uses a branch protection for {} that mentions the '{}' github team; | ||
| but that team does not seem to exist"#, | ||
| r#"repo '{}' uses a branch protection for {} that mentions the '{}' github team; but that team does not seem to exist"#, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I put this error and the next one on the same line to improve how they look in github actions.














Is there a preferred moment when we want to merge this?