You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Hey! Thanks for releasing stack-pr, I'm really enjoying it ❤️
I do have a question/comment – when I amend a local commit in the middle of the stack and then run stack-pr submit, I'd expect that unchanged commits/PRs (at least those coming before the amended one) shouldn't have to be updated on GH. Is this fair?
Right now this doesn't seem to be the case. Details below re: the "base branch" part, but I think this is a part of a more general topic of checking if something's no-op and reducing the noise in PRs.
Some updates still need to be done even for PRs lower in the stack - e.g. we need to update the PR description to include a link to the new PR. But you're correct that for that alone we ideally shouldn't have to change base branch back and forth.
However, not doing that is not always that simple: the reason we set base branches for all PRs in the stack before the update to main is to prevent GitHub from accidental closes of PRs when they are reordered in the stack (GH will close if base branch gets ahead of PR branch). There are some more details on that nuance here: #29 (comment)
It should be possible to avoid some of these updates though.
Hey! Thanks for releasing stack-pr, I'm really enjoying it ❤️
I do have a question/comment – when I amend a local commit in the middle of the stack and then run
stack-pr submit
, I'd expect that unchanged commits/PRs (at least those coming before the amended one) shouldn't have to be updated on GH. Is this fair?Right now this doesn't seem to be the case. Details below re: the "base branch" part, but I think this is a part of a more general topic of checking if something's no-op and reducing the noise in PRs.
Details:
I have the following stack: artempyanykh/marksman#366
The sequence of steps is:
1] stack-pr submit
2] amend the local commit corresponding to 2nd from the top
#368
I see that 2nd from the bottom got its base branch updated
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: