-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 753
Conversation
2. Pin the repositories to each other. | ||
3. Check they pass (go green). | ||
4. Await review if appropriate. | ||
5. Remove the commit from one. We will merge ignoring the failure. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I believe it is meant to be "from step 2", not one.
3. Check they pass (go green). | ||
4. Await review if appropriate. | ||
5. Remove the commit from one. We will merge ignoring the failure. | ||
6. Remove the commit from the other, check it passes with the other commit now on main. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
By the way, it won't if we delete the merged PR branch.
It's getting tricky when the change spans more than two repositories.
The best approach is to not delete PR branches until all but the last PR is merged.
5. Remove the commit from one. We will merge ignoring the failure. | ||
6. Remove the commit from the other, check it passes with the other commit now on main. | ||
7. Merge the other. | ||
8. Rebuild the other main to check it still passes. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can we trigger "main" by hand?
"Rebuild" sounds like "you should rebuild", while it's probably not possible for contributors. Do you think it makes sense to rephrase this to something like "we will trigger builds for the main branch of affected repositories to check if everything is in order"?
7. Merge the other. | ||
8. Rebuild the other main to check it still passes. | ||
|
||
Steps 5-8 should happen contiguously (e.g. one after another but within a short timespan) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Typo in "contiguously"
Was your source dirty? These changes don't match rspec/rspec-dev#270 ? |
39a7c1c
to
03567fa
Compare
I think the last command run for plan text file was long time ago when I see the timestamp in file. https://github.com/rspec/rspec-dev/blob/main/common_plaintext_files/CONTRIBUTING.md.erb#L55-L66 I pull rebase rspec-dev then I will open a PR to reflect @pirj proposal on contributing doc. |
These are some updates, generated from rspec-dev's rake tasks.
rspec/rspec-dev#270