-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 20
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
Prow: Fix milestone applier config #897
Prow: Fix milestone applier config #897
Conversation
@lentzi90: Overrode contexts on behalf of lentzi90: metal3-ubuntu-e2e-integration-test-main In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
/lgtm
/lgtm |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
One issue, plus older milestones still need renaming.
/hold
until they're consistently named.
But generally, this is what we agreed, so
/approve
prow/config/plugins.yaml
Outdated
release-0.5: v0.5 | ||
main: "BMO - v0.9" | ||
release-0.8: "BMO - v0.8" | ||
release-0.7: "BMO - v0.7" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There is no BMO 0.7
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
there was an issue during release there is a comment on the milestone
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hmm but we have a branch and milestone. Should we remove it from here because we don't expect to use it or do we just keep it?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We should not have milestone, and branch is locked, so it should not be mentioned anywhere.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Makes sense. I will remove it from here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We have only branch no milestone but yes IMO we can get rid of that 0,7 branch.
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: tuminoid The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
Signed-off-by: Lennart Jern <[email protected]>
60ab57b
to
483ddca
Compare
/override metal3-ubuntu-e2e-integration-test-main |
@lentzi90: Overrode contexts on behalf of lentzi90: metal3-ubuntu-e2e-integration-test-main In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
/lgtm
It think this is good to go now. |
Thanks @Rozzii ! |
@lentzi90: Updated the
In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. |
Now it should match the actual milestones.