Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

dev-cmd/bump: add --no-fork switch #16740

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Feb 23, 2024
Merged

dev-cmd/bump: add --no-fork switch #16740

merged 2 commits into from
Feb 23, 2024

Conversation

p-linnane
Copy link
Member

@p-linnane p-linnane commented Feb 23, 2024

  • Have you followed the guidelines in our Contributing document?
  • Have you checked to ensure there aren't other open Pull Requests for the same change?
  • Have you added an explanation of what your changes do and why you'd like us to include them?
  • Have you written new tests for your changes? Here's an example.
  • Have you successfully run brew style with your changes locally?
  • Have you successfully run brew typecheck with your changes locally?
  • Have you successfully run brew tests with your changes locally?

This PR brings the --no-fork switch in bump-cask-pr and bump-formula-pr to brew bump. Given that maintainers are now using branches within the main repo, this will make things easier in two ways:

  1. Maintainers can make manual changes to formulae or casks, save them, and then run brew bump --open-pr --no-fork foo to handle the rest of the PR process with their local changes incorporated.
  2. We can use this for BrewTestBot's autobump PR's. This will reduce the thousands of stale branches in the BrewTestBot forks (which I still plan to deal with).

Example PR opened using this branch: Homebrew/homebrew-core#163948

As usual, thanks to @Bo98 for his guidance so I could put this together.

@p-linnane p-linnane merged commit b1fbd59 into master Feb 23, 2024
28 checks passed
@p-linnane p-linnane deleted the bump-no-fork branch February 23, 2024 20:42
@MikeMcQuaid
Copy link
Member

Thanks @p-linnane! Wasn't worth blocking this PR but I think ideally this would intelligently figure out whether to use a fork or not based on maintainer permissions. I'll maybe look at that in future 👍🏻

@p-linnane
Copy link
Member Author

That sounds awesome. It's a bit out of my ability I think, so looking forward to seeing if you take a look!

@github-actions github-actions bot added the outdated PR was locked due to age label Mar 27, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Mar 27, 2024
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
outdated PR was locked due to age
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants