Closed juliogonzalez closed 7 years ago
gitarro rerun changed-since !!!
gitarro rerun changed-since !!!
gitarro rerun changed-since !!!
gitarro rerun changed-since !!!
gitarro rerun changed-since !!!
@juliogonzalez i would like that we split this big WIP Pr in small Pull-Requests, for reviewing it's more safe and we can discuss better
I agree, the refactor must be done in advance.
IMHO as soon as #47 is merged that will save us some problems with the GitHub API limits, and we should focus on #66, so we can keep adding more code without getting complains from rubocop (in the end he's right: we should split up the code into different clases and files, so it is easier to find things and track changes).
Closing the PR for the moment (but keeping the branch, since git_op.rb was already working).
WARNING!!!! WARNING!!!! WARNING!!!!
This is still an experimental feature.
It is already tested locally, but I would like to make more extensive testing before merging it.
Anyway it can be already reviewed, so feel free to have a look and comment anything strange you see. Feedback will be more than welcomed.
WARNING!!!! WARNING!!!! WARNING!!!!
Second round, this time with retrocompatibility.
If
--no_merge_upstream
is present then gitarro will:The good thing about this change is that if the repository is big, gitarro will try fetch as less information possible.
As a way to avoid problems, gitarro now detects if a PR is not mergeable.
When that happens gitarro will mark the test as failed and remove the magic comment if needed at the PR, and will write a warning to the log.
If
--no_merge_upstream
is NOT present, gitarro will work as it worked before, but the PR mergeability detection will work.