Closed pradyunsg closed 3 years ago
Do you think we should support both? <botname>.yml
with a fallback to config.yml
? Should we merge settings if set in both?
I think I picked up this config.yml
thing from https://github.com/KengoTODA/rtd-bot/ but I probably saw it elsewhere. Maybe it even was being promoted by Probot at some point.
Looks like a holywarish topic tho. It feels like there's two camps in the Python community: ones who want to put all the configs in one file and others who don't. (Also known as putting flake8+pylint+tox into setup.cfg vs their own configs :smiley:)
Do you think we should support both?
I think that'd be reasonable.
Should we merge settings if set in both?
Fail if you see both -- "choose a camp". :P
Fail if you see both -- "choose a camp". :P
Now I think that I would rather not waste another HTTP call if the first config is there. Just check <botname>.yml
and only if it's missing also download config.yml
.
I've done some thinking and supporting a fallback is waste of an HTTP call to (hence is bad for the API rate limit). I'll keep the fallback for now and attempt to track down all the App installs to replace the config locations.
https://github.com/pypa/pip/tree/229981192d56d4bd4f1750589097fd0d0b098d64/.github
As of today, pip's
.github
directory contains a bunch of<botname>.yml
files for configuration of the GitHub Bots that we're using. It'd be nice to have achronographer.yml
file in sync with that instead of aconfig.yml
file.