Replies: 1 comment
|
I would also find something like that really useful. Maybe this could even be combined with a feature such that it is only necessary for the top PR of a stack to fulfil all merge requirements as I do see the use case of lower PRs on the stack breaking those temporarily and then having one PR on top for fixing. |
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
I tried using stacked PRs to split a change into a few logically distinct pieces to make them easier to review. But, merging them one at a time would leave main in an undesirable state. It would be really helpful to have a way to mark "only mergeable as a full stack".
Example:
Is this a misuse of the stacked PRs feature? I originally thought something like this was a perfectly reasonable use-case. But, it doesn't seem to be fully supported, because PR1 could be merged by itself accidentally, once approved.
Combining all these changes into a single PR is also undesirable because this logical split is much easier to review. These changes touch many different files throughout the codebase; splitting them like this makes it clear which file changes are relevant to each logical step (feature / CI coverage / improved messaging).
All reactions