Enforce Labels Workflow: Treat "Backports from WordPress Core" as allowable label #53203
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…owable label. None of the existing "[Type]" labels describe a backport, though one describes code that requires backporting into Core. In this change the backport label satisfies the labeling requirement. Alternatively a new "[Type] Backport from WordPress Core" label could be created, but that would imply requiring two practically identical labels for each backport PR.
|
thanks @alexstine - I'm going to merge this, but if anyone objects or has a better suggestion we can change it or revert it. |
|
Thanks, Dennis. Looks good to me, too. It's a label I wasn't sure about since it's often used in combination with other type-related labels, but sometimes not. Let's see if/when people try to use it in combination with others and what they think. |
this came up for me in #52908 where none of the |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What?
None of the existing "[Type]" labels describe a backport, though one describes code that requires backporting into Core.
In this change the backport label satisfies the labeling requirement. Alternatively a new "[Type] Backport from WordPress Core" label could be created, but that would imply requiring two practically identical labels for each backport PR.
Why?
The workflow is currently rejecting PRs for missing a required label, but I found no appropriate label to satisfy the workflow. We should not block work while providing no path to unblock that work.
How?
Adds the existing backport label as an acceptable label.