Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


Skip to content

Navigation Menu

Sign in
Appearance settings

Search code, repositories, users, issues, pull requests...

Provide feedback

We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Sign up
Appearance settings

When we have merged_at info, just use that, because a PR's merge event commit date seems to merely be the date of the last commit, which is often very different than the date the PR was merged.#620

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 ourterms of service andprivacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub?Sign in to your account

Conversation

zyphlar
Copy link

I'm not sure what the state of development is... it seems like this option has been considered and rejected by#617 however it solved the problem for me. Regardless, the github API appears to return events pointing to commits which are not the "merge commit," but rather the "last commit in the PR," which in my case are weeks apart. So this makes the script usable for me. Note I only use PRs, not issues, so this is not tested beyond manually running it against my own repo and getting better output.

…t commit date seems to merely be the date of the last commit, which is often very different than the date the PR was merged.
@zyphlar
Copy link
Author

FYI: I wrote this to fix a version I installed viagem install and not based on the current codebase. I don't experience the same problem with the current codebase, so maybe this was solved already.

@zyphlar
Copy link
Author

The problem I do experience, however, is I don't seem to be able to include a changelog for i.e. version 1.0.1 in the tag/release of 1.0.1 -- not only that, I have to tag a commit after the last pull request for that release in order to get that PR to get included. So it's almost a double catch-22, for each release I have to push a junk commit (i.e. "increment version" and tagit as v1.0.1) and then I have to push another commit with the actual CHANGELOG for that version. Then, if I want 1.0.1 to include its own changelog, I have to delete the tag locally and remotely, and reassign/re-push that tag.

Am I missing something? Is there another common workflow?

@hunner
Copy link
Contributor

@zyphlar With the merge of#619 (in master but not released) hopefully situations like the one you describe won't happen any more. Let me know!

@skywinder
Copy link
Member

@zyphlar thanks for the request, as@hunner says, seems it already fixed in the whole, bigger PR.
Feel free to reopen this PR, if it still actual. Cheers 👍

@zyphlar
Copy link
Author

@skywinder thanks! Off topic, but do you know if such a thing exists for GitLab? I've moved all my stuff and am missing the features of this tool... maybe I can do some work to support other APIs...

@skywinder
Copy link
Member

@zyphlar Yep! :)
Here here is a bunch of things going on:#657
Feel free to participate! 👍

Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account?Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants
@zyphlar@hunner@skywinder

[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2025 Movatter.jp