-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.6k
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
Auto merge pull requests when all checks succeeded via WebUI #19648
Conversation
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as duplicate.
This comment was marked as duplicate.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
well I think, we should not have to document it
(code already describe it that way but UI does not ...) |
However, if I am a frontend developer, how can I read a lot of backend code to understand how it works ...... even if the backend code might become incorrect during refactoring ..... |
First, How about to make the state machine graph TD;
A[Manual Merge] --> B[Auto Merge];
B --> C[Cancel Merge];
C --> A;
|
I do not think that an admin should have to cancel an scheduled auto merge before they do a normal merge. The admin should be able to bypass the checks and scheduled auto merge, then do the normal merge in one click. But if you prefer to change the logic, there is no blocker from my side, edit on this PR directly. |
You are right. Admin should not be blocked by that. But I think that's what the complicated thing. We have to put both manually merge and auto merge in the UI in that situation and have to have a lock between manual merge and auto merge. To avoid that, we can simplify the process. I'm not sure if this is the right direction. Just my thought and more ideas are welcome. |
About this PR, I think it should either:
Otherwise these already merged backend code and translations would become dead code and might be more difficult to be maintained in the future. |
|
219f221
to
9bd5f97
Compare
I think the merge style should be decided when starting to auto merge. The change of merge style should not be allowed before cancel the auto merge. |
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.
Tested it.
Seems to work now as intended (apart from the small translation issue).
Let's keep improving the UI for another PR and get this merged for 1.17.
Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
🚀 |
* giteaoffical/main: Fix signal loop in graceful manager (go-gitea#19943) Prettify number of issues (go-gitea#17760) Improve file header on mobile (go-gitea#19945) Unify repo settings & show better error (go-gitea#19828) [skip ci] Updated translations via Crowdin fixed comment typo (go-gitea#19944) Auto merge pull requests when all checks succeeded via WebUI (go-gitea#19648) Fix some mirror bugs (go-gitea#18649)
…a#19648) Add WebUI part of Auto merge feature close go-gitea#19621 Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
taken from #9307, they where removed to get the feature in ...
close #19621
TODO: