Skip to content

Consider all companions from all PRs descriptions #19

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

Conversation

joao-paulo-parity
Copy link
Contributor

@joao-paulo-parity joao-paulo-parity commented Dec 14, 2021

related to #17

trialed in paritytech/substrate#10496

closes #3

@joao-paulo-parity joao-paulo-parity marked this pull request as ready for review December 15, 2021 12:55
@joao-paulo-parity joao-paulo-parity marked this pull request as draft December 15, 2021 12:55

echo "Patching $this_repo into $dependent"
diener patch \
--target "$org_github_prefix/$comp" \
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

since we'll be using --target from now on instead of the fixed --substrate, --polkadot, --cumulus, etc., $this_repo_diener_arg can be deprecated. I plan to do so in a future PR (#20).

@joao-paulo-parity joao-paulo-parity marked this pull request as ready for review December 15, 2021 16:41
fi

echo "running checks for the default branch of $dependent_repo"
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is just duplicated logic which was moved into patch_and_check_dependent

@joao-paulo-parity
Copy link
Contributor Author

paritytech/substrate#10496 (comment)

The implementation scope for this PR is complete

@joao-paulo-parity joao-paulo-parity requested a review from a team December 15, 2021 16:55
Copy link
Contributor

@TriplEight TriplEight left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

just a couple of nits. Otherwise, it should be tested.

@joao-paulo-parity
Copy link
Contributor Author

just a couple of nits. Otherwise, it should be tested.

@TriplEight it was tested

paritytech/substrate#10496 (comment)
paritytech/substrate#10496 (comment)

@joao-paulo-parity joao-paulo-parity marked this pull request as draft December 17, 2021 13:19
@joao-paulo-parity joao-paulo-parity marked this pull request as ready for review December 17, 2021 13:30
Comment on lines 234 to 244
Attempting to merge $repo#$pr_number with master after fetching its last $merge_ancestor_max_depth commits.

If this step fails, either:

- $repo#$pr_number has conflicts with master

*OR*

- A common merge ancestor could not be found between master and the last $merge_ancestor_max_depth commits of $repo#$pr_number.

Both cases can be solved by merging master into $repo#$pr_number.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

❤️

@joao-paulo-parity joao-paulo-parity merged commit c1403ac into paritytech:master Dec 17, 2021
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.

multiple companions
2 participants