[Pulp-dev] PR merging

Matthias Dellweg mdellweg at redhat.com
Wed Sep 30 08:10:26 UTC 2020

This just reminds me that Gitlab has a very nice "merge when CI passes
button" to decouple the merge question from the reviews.
The only way i could see this happen in Github is via setting a label that
instructs the PR processor to merge when (label is set) && (ci is green) &&
(other conditions).
Does not sound too user friendly, but labels can only be set by people with
merge permissions anyway (so not a security concern).

On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 8:04 PM Daniel Alley <dalley at redhat.com> wrote:

> I have some doubts about the cost/benefit ratio of coding automation to
> merge PRs vs. simply changing the default option / being selective about
> which options are available.
> I like the idea in general though.  A lot of projects do something like
> this.  I occasionally contributed to the Servo project (RIP) and they used
> automation to manage this.  The benefits were, their tests suites ran for
> nearly 2 hours on 3 different operating systems, so the feedback loop was
> quite slow, and automatically triggering the full test run every time a PR
> was changed would be a horrendous waste of resources at the scale they were
> running at.  So basically they would run a minimal CI within the PR, then
> require a manual review, and once approved it would trigger the full CI,
> and if that passed then it would automatically merge the PR hours later
> whenever it finished.
> If our test suites keep getting longer and longer and take more than the
> 20-25 minutes they currently take, I can definitely see how the commit
> processor approach could add value.
> On the other hand, it has the downside that, sometimes even once a commit
> is approved you might want to change something minor like rebasing the
> commits manually, and automation might start getting in the way of things
> like that.  Or, another example, sometimes there's only minor changes
> requested and it doesn't warrant a re-review. Currently what we do pretty
> often is just approve the PR, leave a note to change the wording here and
> there, and the author can just merge it whenever they're done with the
> minor changes.
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 12:49 PM David Davis <daviddavis at redhat.com>
> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> Last week the discussion about how to merge PRs got me thinking about how
>> we could potentially programmatically merge PRs. The openshift project on
>> github does this[0] and I wondered if it would work for Pulp.
>> I think the main benefits would be (1) we'd be able to code how to best
>> merge PRs and (2) we'd no longer see PRs sitting around that are ready to
>> merge but not merged (granted this doesn't happen often).
>> I created a PoC against the PR processor that's quite simple (here are
>> the relevant bits[1]). It's worth noting that we can still prevent PRs from
>> being merged by setting them to drafts (I believe both the PR author or any
>> repo owner do this) and the PR processor won't merge anything unless it's
>> ready to be merged.
>> I myself am a bit conflicted about this so feedback would be appreciated.
>> [0] https://github.com/openshift
>> [1]
>> https://github.com/pulp/pulp-ci/pull/737/files#diff-cbdf61d38083f599940c37eeb49cb0a9R116-R141
>> David
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
> _______________________________________________
> Pulp-dev mailing list
> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20200930/93b9c460/attachment.htm>

More information about the Pulp-dev mailing list