Skip to content

docs: add deprecation workarounds documentation for allow_inplace_checks #7215

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Draft
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Draft

docs: add deprecation workarounds documentation for allow_inplace_checks #7215

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
20 changes: 20 additions & 0 deletions src/content/docs/configuration/file-format.mdx
View file
Open in desktop
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I would suggest a different format, with subtitles instead of numbers and more details/information to help users to understand the change

Suggested change
### `allow_inplace_checks` deprecation notice
/a small note about the motivation of the change/
#### Preserving commit history
Set up your merge queue to use the `fast-forward` mode for the attribute `queue_branch_merge_method`.
This way, no untested commit SHA will be merged.
See the `queue_rules` [documentation](/configuration/file-format/#queue-rules) for more details.
#### Preventing Mergify draft PRs
/a small note to encourage users to adopt the draft PR, finishing by something like "but since we understand that it could be an issue for your workflow, there is an alternative .../
... you can leverage the [Workflow Automation](/workflow/) feature with the [rebase](/workflow/actions/rebase/) and [merge](/workflow/actions/merge/) actions. This way, once a pull request validates your rules, you can directly rebase and merge it.

Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -102,6 +102,26 @@ The top-level key `queue_rules` allows to define the rules that reign over your

<OptionsTable def="QueueRuleModel" />

### Working around the `allow_inplace_checks` attribute deprecation

As the `allow_inplace_checks` attribute is deprecated, different choices are available.

1. If you want to merge your pull requests without the generation of draft PRs, you can leverage
the [Workflow Automation](/workflow/) feature with the [rebase](/workflow/actions/rebase/)
and [merge](/workflow/actions/merge/) actions. This way, once a pull request validates your rules,
you can directly rebase and merge it.

2. If draft PRs are not an issue for you, but you want to preserve you commit history by avoiding merge commit shas,
you can setup your merge queue to use the `fast-forward` mode for the attribute `merge_method`.
This way, the merge queue will keep the linearity of your commit history.
See the `queue_rules` [documentation](/configuration/file-format/#queue-rules) for more details.
Comment on lines +114 to +117
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
2. If draft PRs are not an issue for you, but you want to preserve you commit history by avoiding merge commit shas,
you can setup your merge queue to use the `fast-forward` mode for the attribute `merge_method`.
This way, the merge queue will keep the linearity of your commit history.
See the `queue_rules` [documentation](/configuration/file-format/#queue-rules) for more details.
2. If draft PRs are not an issue for you, but you want to preserve your the sha used to run CI jobs,
you can setup your merge queue to use the `fast-forward` mode for the attribute `queue_branch_merge_method`.
This way, no untested commit sha will be merged.
See the `queue_rules` [documentation](/configuration/file-format/#queue-rules) for more details.


3. If draft PRs are not an issue for you, but you want to limit their amount, you can choose to leverage
the `batch_size` and `speculative_checks` attributes in your `queue_rules`.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I wouldn't mention speculative checks. First, because we should use max_parallel_checks instead of speculative_checks. And parallel checks create more draft PRs. The only option that reduces draft PRs is batch_size.

See the `queue_rules` [documentation](/configuration/file-format/#queue-rules) for more details.

For any further questions, feel free to <a href="mailto:[email protected]">Contact our support</a>.

Comment on lines +119 to +124
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't think the amount is a new problem.

Suggested change
3. If draft PRs are not an issue for you, but you want to limit their amount, you can choose to leverage
the `batch_size` and `speculative_checks` attributes in your `queue_rules`.
See the `queue_rules` [documentation](/configuration/file-format/#queue-rules) for more details.
For any further questions, feel free to <a href="mailto:[email protected]">Contact our support</a>.
For any further questions, feel free to <a href="mailto:[email protected]">contact our support team</a>.

### Priority Rules

The top-level key `priority rules` allows to define the rules that will determine
Expand Down