summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/pkgs/development/python-modules/python-mapnik/python-mapnik_std_optional.patch
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorWolfgang Walther <walther@technowledgy.de>2025-08-13 14:53:00 +0200
committerWolfgang Walther <walther@technowledgy.de>2025-08-14 18:28:30 +0200
commitbf3607aa872cc42996ae4553c00088a64c438c91 (patch)
tree33df3f5464babf68854c783abe7f4bdda3077b1c /pkgs/development/python-modules/python-mapnik/python-mapnik_std_optional.patch
parentaa6eab08d9f79f2318b465c0667a1f6600607bab (diff)
ci/github-script/commits: allow reason for not cherry-picking
This change allows giving a reason via footer of the commit message for why this commit is not cherry-picked. This avoids having to "explain" the automated review comment afterwards - instead, this explanation can be given immediately when writing that commit. For example, for an update of `xen` on the stable branch, this could be: ``` xen: 4.19.3-unstable-2025-07-09 -> 4.19.3 [... commit message ...] Not-cherry-picked-because: unstable is on a different minor version ``` This would then be shown as part of the automated review. The severity of this will be downgraded from "warning" to "important". We still treat the review as "changes requested", because it would be very complicated and noisy to handle two different categories of reviews, some with requested changes and some with comments only. An alternative would be to not show this review at all. However, given that the reviewers expectation on backports should already be "if it's not a clean backport, the automated review will tell me what to look at", it seems better to show these and have the committer confirm by dismissing the review. Otherwise we risk merging actually unreviewed commits.
Diffstat (limited to 'pkgs/development/python-modules/python-mapnik/python-mapnik_std_optional.patch')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions