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

Updating backport workflow to use forked action #4920

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 22, 2022
Merged

Conversation

leahwicz
Copy link
Contributor

Description

This is a change to our backporting GitHub Action workflow to use a forked version of the backport action so that we are able to use a custom source branch name that doesn't conflict with our existing branch protection regex.

Forked repo with the updated source branch naming convention:
dbt-labs/backport@db603f2

Checklist

  • I have signed the CLA
  • I have run this code in development and it appears to resolve the stated issue
  • This PR includes tests, or tests are not required/relevant for this PR
  • I have added information about my change to be included in the CHANGELOG.

@leahwicz leahwicz added the Skip Changelog Skips GHA to check for changelog file label Mar 22, 2022
@cla-bot cla-bot bot added the cla:yes label Mar 22, 2022
@leahwicz leahwicz requested review from emmyoop and gshank March 22, 2022 01:45
Copy link
Member

@emmyoop emmyoop left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This looks good!

Can we add a line to the README over in the forked action saying what the difference is so it's clear why we forked it?

@leahwicz leahwicz merged commit 9c5ee59 into main Mar 22, 2022
@leahwicz leahwicz deleted the leahwicz/backport branch March 22, 2022 13:10
@leahwicz leahwicz mentioned this pull request Mar 22, 2022
4 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
cla:yes Skip Changelog Skips GHA to check for changelog file
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants