Redo the Pull Request Walk-through docs#7854
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I like the extra clarifications on the cherry-pick section.
Is there a particular reason you are using so many exclamations marks?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just grammar. But apparently the use of an exclamation mark to remark an imperative isn't necessarily english...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The one left now is i think warranted for.
Adjust to Markdown layout and clarify details around patchback.
mdellweg
force-pushed
the
doc_cherry_pick
branch
from
fc5b047 to
4d90d22
Compare
|
|
||
| If you are fixing a bug that should also be backported to another branch than `main`, add the backport label, .e.g `backport-3.18`. PR authors can also add or remove this label if they have write access. | ||
| Usually, a bugfix for a bug found in a released version of Pulp should be backported. | ||
| If backporting to a specific branch, all supported branches inbetween must receive the backport too. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If we say this we should also say where to find the list of supported branches. But realistically an external contributor isn't going to be the one deciding what to backport and where.
Also "inbetween" -> "in between"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmm. So "Usually," is more like "It is not uncommon that".
What I really wanted to stress is, that you never need to know, because the existing backport labels tell you all about the branches.
That's then why you should never add missing backport labels manually.
Co-authored-by: Daniel Alley <dalley@redhat.com>
3 participants
Adjust to Markdown layout and clarify details around patchback.
📜 Checklist
See: Pull Request Walkthrough