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
I was wondering whether we could get a PR label for conflicts, automatically added and removed by a GitHub action? I believe there are existing actions for this, though I haven't tried any of them personally.
I think it'd be useful for a variety of reasons.
For people with a lot of open PRs, it'd make it easier for them to keep those PRs free from conflicts.
I think it'd also be useful for reviewers, especially when trying to review older PRs. That long list can get a bit overwhelming, but PRs without conflicts tend to be a good place to start.
It could also act as an incentive for people to fix the conflicts in their PRs, especially if conflict-free PRs are given priority by reviewers.
I wrote a quick script myself to check for conflicts. The figures I got were:
Year
Mergeable
Conflicts
2019
0
3
2020
1
5
2021
9
25
2022
41
59
2023
101
99
Those figures are a few days out of date, some have been closed or merged since then, but you get the gist.
On a related note, these 2 PRs are pointing at the 3.2 branch, rather than main or minor, so they don't appear to have conflicts, even though they probably do. Could someone update them to point at main or minor?
reacted with thumbs up emoji reacted with thumbs down emoji reacted with laugh emoji reacted with hooray emoji reacted with confused emoji reacted with heart emoji reacted with rocket emoji reacted with eyes emoji
-
I was wondering whether we could get a PR label for
conflicts
, automatically added and removed by a GitHub action? I believe there are existing actions for this, though I haven't tried any of them personally.I think it'd be useful for a variety of reasons.
For people with a lot of open PRs, it'd make it easier for them to keep those PRs free from conflicts.
I think it'd also be useful for reviewers, especially when trying to review older PRs. That long list can get a bit overwhelming, but PRs without conflicts tend to be a good place to start.
It could also act as an incentive for people to fix the conflicts in their PRs, especially if conflict-free PRs are given priority by reviewers.
I wrote a quick script myself to check for conflicts. The figures I got were:
Those figures are a few days out of date, some have been closed or merged since then, but you get the gist.
On a related note, these 2 PRs are pointing at the
3.2
branch, rather thanmain
orminor
, so they don't appear to have conflicts, even though they probably do. Could someone update them to point atmain
orminor
?events
#2164Thanks.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions