Skip to content
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

Remember PR remote name for cherry_picker --continue #8

Open
ncoghlan opened this issue Jun 2, 2017 · 4 comments
Open

Remember PR remote name for cherry_picker --continue #8

ncoghlan opened this issue Jun 2, 2017 · 4 comments

Comments

@ncoghlan
Copy link
Contributor

ncoghlan commented Jun 2, 2017

The option to set the PR remote does work with cherry_picker --continue, but currently needs to be specified explicitly, rather than being remembered from the original CLI invocation.

@Mariatta
Copy link
Member

Mariatta commented Jun 4, 2017

What --continue does right now is do git commit in the current branch (as long as it's not a master branch) then push to origin.
If we want to remember the previously specified pr-remote then it has to be stored in a temp file or something? 🤔

@ncoghlan
Copy link
Contributor Author

ncoghlan commented Jun 4, 2017

Aye, something along those lines. Such a file could potentially also be used to keep track of whether or not the commit step had already been completed, as before I finally realised that --pr-remote needed to be passed together with --continue, I accidentally created 3 copies of the cherry-pick commit.

One possible option: we could add .tmp-backport/ to CPython's .gitignore file, and then use that as a working directory for temporary state in cherry_picker.py.

@webknjaz
Copy link
Contributor

FTR: Now with the work done in #295/#277 it should possible to implements storing more state-related data in git config --local (i.e. .git/config) throughout the whole backport cycle.

@Mariatta Mariatta transferred this issue from python/core-workflow May 30, 2019
@CAM-Gerlach
Copy link
Member

To note, the fact that this wasn't stored along with the other state was also incredibly confusing for me when attempting to reproduce #78

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

No branches or pull requests

4 participants