I am currently attempting to build a small program, that, using the Github API would make a small change to a file in a repository, add a tag to the commit that change belongs to, then points the HEAD of the branch to said commit, which would then trigger Actions, after the entire operation has completed. I noticed, however, that when I tested my code, the commit would show up, but there would not be a tag visible anywhere. I made note of the fact that the API was, in fact, receiving the request to set the tag, and there it seems to have gone through, but not on the repo itself it seems.
For reference, I was following this tutorial, and then adding this call after step 4.
Any help would be very much appreciated!
Related
I am trying to automate my project boards. I would like an action to trigger when someone opens a Pull Request and links it to a issue on the board, then the issue would be moved to "In Review".
I imagine once I trigger by a pull_request, this information would be seen on the given environment variables. But I dumped all of them and I could not find any reference to the issue I am linking and would like to move on the project board.
Can someone give me some light on what I could do to achieve this result?
First you can reference an issue in your commit message described in the documentation. Then you can set up built-in automations for the project board. If you then push something to your repository and create a merge request, the issue should be automatically linked and moved to the column "In Review".
I am a noob to github's organziation settings and all. Don't know if we need these settings for the question Im about to ask.
So what I want to achieve is to show the already opened pull request's link on a subsequent push. In the past when working with bitbucket and gitlab with a development team, the link used to appear both on the initial push to create a pull request and also on subsequent commits push to PR. But in my current workflow it only appears on initial push to create the PR. (Note I haven't been setting up repositories in the past myself and just starting to explore this area so no idea if in the past lead engineer has been adding any settings or not)
This is what I see on initial push:
And this is on subsequent push. No link to already opened pull request
What am I missing? And is it even possible to do?
Any read or keywords to search for would be appreciated.
First a remark : when running git push, lines prefixed with remote: are actually generated by something on the remote ("something" = a script or a program or ...). If you want to see something more, check if there is some setting on Github's side to re-display the merge request number when you update a branch (I must confess I don't know if and how this can be done).
If you want to find what pull request is linked to a known branch, there is a specific search filter (in the web GUI) for that : head:branch_name
As an example :
Here is how you could get PR #1037 (linked to a branch named leaksan-100-part2) on git's repository :
is:pr head:leaksan-100-part2
If you want to get this from a script, you should probably use Github's API :
the doc to Pulls API mentions a base attribute :
base string query Filter pulls by base branch name. Example: gh-pages.
I am not by any means a sophisticated github user. I have learned the minimum handful of commands needed to add, commit, and push my project code to the public github.com repository. So far it's been working fairly well... until today when I tried to create a new release (my third).
For some reason, when I try to publish my new release, I get the message
Tag could not be created. Pre-receive hooks failed.
I have never seen this message before.
I have tried various different tag names; I have tried logging out and back in again; I have tried pre-tagging on my local disk copy of the repo; I have pushed and pulled (both ends are up to date). This about exhausts my repertoire of things to try :-(
As a relative n00b I find this message incredibly opaque (sigh). I have tried googling for it, but quickly got in over my head -- most of the hits I found were discussions about people setting up their own networked repos and installing or tweaking their own custom "pre-receive hooks", whereas I am just a dumb user of github.com apparently struggling with whatever "pre-receive hooks" they have installed (?). If anyone can at least point me in the right direction I'd be most grateful.
Make sure you select the tag version in the dropdown. The GitHub form will let you submit when this field is blank, but it will always display the mentioned error message. (You do not need a 'v' prefix.).
The latest Github form makes this more cryptic by having a dropdown titled 'Tag:Choose or Create" that hides the fact that this field is both required but not set.
Latest Github Form
Older Github Form
In a GitHub context, I have seen that error message in this issue
It could be a tag naming convention issue.
The GitHub release documentation recommends (enforces?) a tag following the semantic versioning naming scheme: vX.Y.Z.
As shown here, try vx.y.z.
Is it possible to create new branch directly from Issue which is posted on Github? We have project hosted on Github with many issues, it would be easy for us just to click one button in Issue web interface and create new branch for it to start developing.
This is not possible directly from the issue interface. I can try to provide you some workarounds and maybe start a debate why one would want this feature:
Creating branches directly on the web interface
After you've noticed that you need to start working on an issue you can just go to the repository main page (keyboard shortcut gc) and create a branch with the name you want:
Chrome extensions
If this is a must for you, you can create a chrome extension that augments the UI and creates a branch directly from the Issues WebUI using the GitHub API. There's a lot of open source extensions that augment the default WebUI.
Is it the most efficient way to start a new feature?
I think this changes from developer to developer, but having worked with GitHub for 7 years using Issues I've never felt the need for this feature because unless it's a one line change that doesn't require local testing or compilation, I still want to get down to my command line and IDE. If I have to do that, I still have to at least git fetch to get the branch I just created directly through the issue interface. If that's the case I've always preferred to just look at the issue and run git checkout -b branch-name, optionally with git push if my team needs to see the branch.
Then the issue name wouldn't normally translate to a branch name, at least I wouldn't want that. So that option to create a branch from an issue would probably need to spin out a prompt to allow me to name the branch what I wanted.
This is just my personal opinion and nothing else, hope it helps :)
GitHub finally added this feature request to their roadmap.
Summary
The branch is the first thing a developer creates when the start
working on a new issue. Creating that association makes it really easy
for someone to then follow the work happening and keep everything
connected as they take their idea to code.
Intended Outcome
We want to help developers get started on work faster and signal to
their team where to find the code changes related to an issue. It
should also be really easy to then follow development to the pull
request without the user needing to do additional work to link
everything together.
How will it work?
From the issue page, a user can quickly create a branch with an
auto-generated or custom name that becomes associated with the issue.
They can then fetch the branch and switch to it in their development
environment and further development changes (such as commits and pull
requests) are automatically associated with the issue.
https://github.com/isaacs/github/issues/1125
Nope. You can subscribe this issue.
You could accomplish this by creating a small script.
I'd start by leveraging the Issues Event webhook. This will fire a JSON payload every time an issue is opened. When the webhook fires, your script can then create a new branch using the Create a Reference API endpoint. Note: URL must be formatted as heads/branch, not just branch.
There is an app that automatically creates branches for issues. You can install it here for free: https://github.com/marketplace/actions/create-issue-branch
If you want to create the branches manually instead of automatically:
It does not enable you (directly) to click on create branch from the issue. Instead you would have to write a comment in the issue consisting of: /cib. If you do that, it automatically creates the branch from the issue.
Please note I have no affiliation with the app.
Recently I saw that Github finally added this feature to its Issues Panel.
All you have to do is navigate to an Issue on Github and scroll down to the following section:
On a Github project, I see a guy made a pull request in Pull Requests section, but I find he made many mistakes so his code need to be corrected. Instead of asking him to change his code, is it possible to do it by myself (that is, I want to correct his code by myself)? and how?
I'm also a member of that project, and I'm new :)
Enabling repository maintainer permissions on existing pull requests
Pull request creators can give these permissions on each of their pull requests when they initially create a pull request from a fork or after they have created the pull request.
On GitHub, navigate to the main page of the upstream repository of your pull request.
In the list of pull requests, navigate to the pull request that you'd like to allow commits on.
In the right sidebar of your pull request, select Allow edits from maintainers. You can change these permissions at any time by unselecting this option.
More details on github help page: Allowing changes to a pull request branch created from a fork
TL;DR
Author of PR can modify an existing pull request to let repository maintainers make commits to your branch.
In order to allow you to make commits to others PR - the author has to set checkbox from the left:
Assuming the original author is responsive enough, it’s always better to ask them to fix it (unless the change is an obvious typo fix, maybe). They might have a reason for writing it the way they did.
If the author isn’t responsive and you’re deciding whether to fix it in place or with a new commit, ask yourself which way the history reads more clearly. If the commit would introduce a regression, you should probably fix it in place (to avoid breaking bisectability). If it handles some cases and you just want to add more cases without significantly changing the existing code, it might be better to add a new commit.
If you do amend the existing commit in any way, make sure to leave a note in the commit message explaining what you changed. One typical style is to leave a note in square brackets, grouped with any Signed-off-by: lines (if applicable):
[your.email#example.com: Refactor new cases into a function for clarity]
For example: linux.git commit b44129b3.
via https://www.quora.com/GitHub-Is-it-bad-etiquette-to-change-someones-pull-request-before-committing