Report what staging branches a PR can land cleanly on

[MylesBorins]

This would be VERY useful information for backporting

[phillipj]

Huh, this sounds like a cool feature! Should it post a comment or add labels?

[addaleax]

I think labels would be good? They are pretty cheap, and maybe it’s just me but I find automated github comments by bots more noisy than helpful.

[jbergstroem]

I reckon just trying to rebase any branch against whatever branch would be pretty cheap? These doesn't have to show up in regular PR's, just one's that has a the land-on-$foo stuff?

[MylesBorins]

what I would personally like to see would be automating adding the
Lts-watch labels if a commit lands cleanly on that release stream

On Tue, Sep 13, 2016, 1:16 AM Johan Bergström notifications@github.com
wrote:

I reckon just trying to rebase any branch against whatever branch would be
pretty cheap? These doesn't have to show up in regular PR's, just one's
that has a the land-on-$foo stuff?

—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#77 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAecV88GKKNsj4uu9w10VuUgaN7_Eyo5ks5qpd1TgaJpZM4J6oMu
.

[jbergstroem]

Oh - that would be pretty neat.

[mscdex]

Why use the lts-watch-* labels? Shouldn't those be added by users whether there are merge conflicts or not?

Also, how would you know which labels should be added (which branches to test), unless you mean to try all branches that are not specifically excluded via do-not-land-on-* labels?

Another issue is how would you keep the labels up-to-date? If someone hasn't updated their PR/branch in awhile, there could be merge conflicts at some point.

If we stick with labels, maybe a new set of labels would be best? Like lands-cleanly-on-* or something?

Is it possible to have a webhook like Travis and other services that shows the information at the bottom of the PR? If so, would that be better than labels?