Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jun 14, 2024. It is now read-only.

Did this repo's collaborators get invited to administer my test repo? #87

Open
nate-double-u opened this issue Jul 23, 2021 · 2 comments
Labels
question Further information is requested

Comments

@nate-double-u
Copy link
Member

nate-double-u commented Jul 23, 2021

I created a new repo using the "Use this template" button to test its behaviour -- I was looking to see how it managed commit history (it looks like it squashes it into 1 'initial commit') -- and I noticed that the .github/settings.yml file is copied over.

Did the collaborators in the settings.yml get an invitation to administer the newly created nate-double-u/testing2 repo?

If so, is this the behaviour we want?

@nate-double-u nate-double-u added the question Further information is requested label Jul 23, 2021
@nate-double-u nate-double-u changed the title Did the collaborators get invited to my test repo generation? Did this repo's collaborators get invited to administer my test repo? Jul 23, 2021
@chalin
Copy link
Collaborator

chalin commented Jul 24, 2021

I created a new repo using the "Use this template" button to test its behaviour -- I was looking to see how it managed commit history (it looks like it squashes it into 1 'initial commit') -- and

Thanks for testing that out.

I noticed that the .github/settings.yml file is copied over.

Oh! Then we'll probably need to be more selective about what we add to that file.

Did the collaborators in the settings.yml get an invitation to administer the newly created nate-double-u/testing2 repo?

I did not, but I don't appear to be an admin for your test repo

If so, is this the behaviour we want?

Having a base settings.yml file to seed certain settings makes sense, but based on what you've discovered, we'll want to remove the collaborators section -- and fall back to using the web UI for that. (My 2 cents)

@nate-double-u
Copy link
Member Author

I created a new repo using the "Use this template" button to test its behaviour -- I was looking to see how it managed commit history (it looks like it squashes it into 1 'initial commit') -- and

Thanks for testing that out.

Once #86 is merged in I'll run another test to see how the settings file works with labels.

I noticed that the .github/settings.yml file is copied over.

Oh! Then we'll probably need to be more selective about what we add to that file.

+1 (our website checklist maybe a good start for a guide for what should be in here)

Did the collaborators in the settings.yml get an invitation to administer the newly created nate-double-u/testing2 repo?

I did not, but I don't appear to be an admin for your test repo

Ya, I checked the settings in the GitHub UI and saw no one else was added automatically, but I was curious if GitHub had sent out emails inviting collaborators in the list. I'm curious when it would be activated -- first change to the file perhaps?

If so, is this the behaviour we want?

Having a base settings.yml file to seed certain settings makes sense, but based on what you've discovered, we'll want to remove the collaborators section -- and fall back to using the web UI for that. (My 2 cents)

The behavior of the .github/settings.yml file isn't well documented with template repos (and searching on it has been a bit hard - lot of results for "issue templates." I think we need to do some more testing to help us decide what we want and don't want in the settings file. (Once we figure it out, it may be worth writing it up somewhere too)

https://probot.github.io/apps/settings/

I think that my nate-double-u org didn't have the app installed when I cloned the repo using the "Use this template" button, but subsequently I have turned it on, and haven't noticed any changes in the settings.

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
question Further information is requested
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants