-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 14.6k
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
Add workflow to automatically update schedule.yaml #45762
Add workflow to automatically update schedule.yaml #45762
Conversation
bbddca3
to
d85cfec
Compare
✅ Pull request preview available for checkingBuilt without sensitive environment variables
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration. |
ce084d6
to
02cc2be
Compare
3f26596
to
565f42a
Compare
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.
Thank you for the PR.
/hold
We're overall wary of having workflows write to GitHub (we'd typically use Prow, but GitHub Actions has gained lots of feature since Prow came into existence).
Let's check that the SIG is happy with this and is confident we can maintain it.
I wonder if we should address #38431 - Split “can approve English content changes” from “can review general website changes” permissions - first. |
I'd like to highlight that the new |
565f42a
to
1ae460b
Compare
02cf82c
to
a91b3c7
Compare
ccd92b0
to
89df646
Compare
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
@kubernetes/sig-docs-leads are we okay to move forward with this? |
/lgtm |
For LGTM on this particular change, let's get it from a SIG tech lead (or a chair acting in their stead). Leaving the existing hold in place. Noting LGTMs from #45762 (comment) and other reviews. As an emeritus tech lead: |
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.
Any CLA issues expected with this workflow?
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.
No, we're using the same approach there for example: kubernetes-sigs/downloadkubernetes#630
Signed-off-by: Sascha Grunert <[email protected]>
89df646
to
a63678a
Compare
/retitle Add workflow to automatically update schedule.yaml |
schedule.yaml
/approve |
@tengqm should we also unhold the PR? |
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
/approve
LGTM label has been added. Git tree hash: 079128f4d58dc10007985c4dcebe5b7d37518b15
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: cpanato, tengqm, xmudrii 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 |
@tengqm Can we unhold and proceed with this PR? We had patch releases yesterday and this is a great opportunity to test this automation. :) |
/hold cancel |
Fixes kubernetes/release#3179
cc @kubernetes/release-managers
Preview: https://deploy-preview-45762--kubernetes-io-main-staging.netlify.app/releases