You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This is an interesting one - do we want developers to be able to work on a new branch locally, merge it with branchToProtect locally, and push it up? Currently, they are able to do so.
Or do we want to force them to open a Pull Request?
I guess it depends on what this GitHook is offering - if it is only to encourage a branching workflow, then what we have is sufficient. If it is to force better visibility of what happens to the branchToProtect, then maybe we want some restrictions in place.
However, thinking ahead to when we implement githook-forced-code-reviews, we would want some way of preventing local merges because otherwise these two GitHooks combined could still be easily bypassed by developers working locally on their branch and merging locally and pushing.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
This is an interesting one - do we want developers to be able to work on a new branch locally, merge it with branchToProtect locally, and push it up? Currently, they are able to do so.
Or do we want to force them to open a Pull Request?
I guess it depends on what this GitHook is offering - if it is only to encourage a branching workflow, then what we have is sufficient. If it is to force better visibility of what happens to the branchToProtect, then maybe we want some restrictions in place.
However, thinking ahead to when we implement githook-forced-code-reviews, we would want some way of preventing local merges because otherwise these two GitHooks combined could still be easily bypassed by developers working locally on their branch and merging locally and pushing.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: