search

balena-io-modules / balena-procbots

Process bots used for automating the development and deployment CI pipeline
https://balena-io-modules.github.io/balena-procbots/
Apache License 2.0
7 stars 3 forks source link

VersionBot: Could support Change-Type: None #188

Open lurch opened 7 years ago

lurch commented 7 years ago

It's been added to versionist https://github.com/resin-io/versionist/issues/81 but AFAIK it's not yet supported by VersionBot. See https://github.com/resin-io/versionist/issues/76 for the rationale - basically it'd be a way to mark small 'typo' style PRs, so that they don't result in pointless version-bumps.

pimterry commented 7 years ago

I'd enthusiastically vote for this, I've definitely found cases where it'd work delightfully.

no-checks does cover similar ground, but it's nice to be able to declare this at commit time, to still get warning messages for failed checks, and to be able to keep the consistent label-based merge flow.

lurch commented 7 years ago

Does the usage of no-checks (to cover this situation) rely on the PR being manually merged, and so wouldn't work for those repos with a protected master branch?

pimterry commented 7 years ago

I believe the way it works is that you can manually merge to protected branches, but only if all the selected status checks pass first. If you don't have a change-type, normally the versionbot check would fail, but if you add no-checks it'll pass regardless, to allow you to do a normal merge.

lurch commented 7 years ago

I'm getting a little out of my depth here, but presumably if a VersionBot-using repo was set up with protected branches, then versionist would be one of the required-statuses; and so if you added a PR with the no-checks label (and I guess you'd need to remember to add the label before creating the PR rather than afterwards), then wouldn't GH complain that one of the required statuses was missing?