FazBrowse GitHub Viewer | Trending |
URL:
| Home
Tools: [Download Repo ZIP]   [Original HTTPS Page]

Add an explicit deprecation date by rneatherway · Pull Request #326 · github/codeql-action · GitHub

Add an explicit deprecation date - #326

Merged
rneatherway merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
rneatherway/on-push-notice
Dec 1, 2020
Merged

rneatherway merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
rneatherway/on-push-notice

Conversation

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

So that we can remove support for the beta configuration of
on: push-only we should communicate a date after which this
will not work.

Merge / deployment checklist

  • Confirm this change is backwards compatible with existing workflows.
  • Confirm the readme has been updated if necessary.

Comment thread src/actions-util.ts Outdated
MismatchedBranches: `Please make sure that every branch in on.pull_request is also in on.push so that Code Scanning can compare pull requests against the state of the base branch.`,
MissingHooks: `Please specify on.push and on.pull_request hooks so that Code Scanning can compare pull requests against the state of the base branch.`,
MissingPullRequestHook: `Please specify an on.pull_request hook so that Code Scanning is run against pull requests.`,
MissingPullRequestHook: `Please specify an on.pull_request hook so that Code Scanning is explicitly run against pull requests. This will be required to see results on pull requests from 2021-01-31.`,

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Choose a reason Spam Abuse Off Topic Outdated Duplicate Resolved Low Quality

Would it be more or less inclusive to spell out the date in words? Though people should realise the format when they try to work out what the 31st month is...

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Choose a reason Spam Abuse Off Topic Outdated Duplicate Resolved Low Quality

It crossed my mind. I think that's a good suggestion. How about 31 January 2021?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Choose a reason Spam Abuse Off Topic Outdated Duplicate Resolved Low Quality

Thanks. That looks much less ambiguous

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Choose a reason Spam Abuse Off Topic Outdated Duplicate Resolved Low Quality

Updated.

rneatherway force-pushed the rneatherway/on-push-notice branch from ca89934 to 15c4618 Compare December 1, 2020 11:08

robertbrignull left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Choose a reason Spam Abuse Off Topic Outdated Duplicate Resolved Low Quality

LGTM

So that we can remove support for the beta configuration of
`on: push`-only we should communicate a date after which this
will not work.
rneatherway force-pushed the rneatherway/on-push-notice branch from 15c4618 to 8e0e34a Compare December 1, 2020 11:10
rneatherway merged commit e6174fc into main Dec 1, 2020
rneatherway deleted the rneatherway/on-push-notice branch December 1, 2020 11:28
github-actions Bot mentioned this pull request Dec 7, 2020
This file contains hidden or 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
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants


Back | FazBrowse Home | New Git URL