Skip to content

Control when an attempt is made to upload releasenotes.md #1093

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

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Nov 26, 2016

Conversation

gep13
Copy link
Member

@gep13 gep13 commented Nov 18, 2016

No description provided.

- Only do this when on the master branch of main GitVersion repo, and when it is NOT a PullRequest
- Ensure that releasenotes.md exists prior to attempting upload
@gep13
Copy link
Member Author

gep13 commented Nov 18, 2016

@pascalberger @asbjornu let me know what you think of this...

@pascalberger
Copy link
Member

Thanks @gep13! LGTM

@gep13
Copy link
Member Author

gep13 commented Nov 18, 2016

@gep13
Copy link
Member Author

gep13 commented Nov 18, 2016

Now just to wait a few extra minutes for Travis 😄

Copy link
Member

@asbjornu asbjornu left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Besides the commited .vscode folder, this looks great! Thanks for the work, @gep13! ❤️

"externalConsole": false
}
]
}
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should anything in the .vscode folder be committed?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@asbjornu I wasn't aware of any rule that it shouldn't be. That file is an easy way to share the required launch command for debugging build.cake file in VSCode.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, these are the settings for debugging and should be committed (one of the three file: settings.json, tasks.json and launch.json which should be under version control)

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@asbjornu See also here, where they are also explicitely excluded in the .gitignore file

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@pascalberger nice, I can add that to the gitignore file. Just away to sign off for the night though, so if Travis ever finishes, and we are all happy, feel free to merge, and I can fix that later.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@gep13 Unfortunately a test case, not releated to the release notes, failed on OS X: https://travis-ci.org/GitTools/GitVersion/jobs/177131223.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@gep13, @pascalberger: Okay, good to know. I agree that it should be in the .gitignore just to make it explicit. 🙂

The set_PriorityClass problem is hopefully fixed by GitTools/GitTools.Core#38, but we need to get that released somehow. Kind of related to this PR, but for different reasons and another repository. 😄

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Mmh, as long as this is not fixed, we can't merge this PR, except by overriding the required status checks. So to cleanly merge this we would need to have the GitTools.Core release and update GitVersion to the new GitTools.Core version in this PR.

@gep13
Copy link
Member Author

gep13 commented Nov 28, 2016

Relates to #1088

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants