Skip to content
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 mailmap check workflow #1644

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Jun 18, 2021
Merged

Conversation

epassaro
Copy link
Member

@epassaro epassaro commented Jun 9, 2021

Description

Checks if all committers in a PR are in the .mailmap (name and email).

Sorted .mailmap alphabetically.

Motivation and context

I'm not sure if this is a good workflow to merge, you decide.

Currently, the TARDIS policy is considering all committers as authors and order them by commit numbers plus other criteria. The new Zenodo metadata pipeline will not fail anymore when an author name is incomplete, or an author committed with different emails. In this case those authors/commits are just dropped and the pipeline keeps working the longest possible without human intervention.

Then, to not lose authors or commit contributions I wrote this pipeline that checks author name and email before merging a PR.

How has this been tested?

  • Testing pipeline.
  • Other.
    The new pipeline itself!

Examples

Type of change

  • Bug fix.
  • New feature.
  • Breaking change.
  • None of the above.

Checklist

  • My change requires a change to the documentation.
    • I have updated the documentation accordingly.
    • (optional) I have built the documentation on my fork following the instructions.
  • I have assigned and requested two reviewers for this pull request.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jun 9, 2021

Codecov Report

Merging #1644 (d3880ed) into master (011f9b7) will decrease coverage by 5.78%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

❗ Current head d3880ed differs from pull request most recent head 7f52f5b. Consider uploading reports for the commit 7f52f5b to get more accurate results
Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1644      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   67.70%   61.92%   -5.79%     
==========================================
  Files          68       62       -6     
  Lines        6091     5702     -389     
==========================================
- Hits         4124     3531     -593     
- Misses       1967     2171     +204     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
...dis/tardis/montecarlo/montecarlo_numba/r_packet.py 25.43% <0.00%> (-5.54%) ⬇️
tardis/tardis/visualization/tools/sdec_plot.py 10.05% <0.00%> (-4.83%) ⬇️
tardis/tardis/io/config_reader.py 82.08% <0.00%> (-4.25%) ⬇️
tardis/tardis/montecarlo/spectrum.py 69.23% <0.00%> (-2.47%) ⬇️
tardis/tardis/plasma/properties/util/macro_atom.py 29.03% <0.00%> (-2.22%) ⬇️
tardis/tardis/plasma/properties/nlte.py 39.21% <0.00%> (-1.74%) ⬇️
...s/tardis/montecarlo/montecarlo_numba/macro_atom.py 43.75% <0.00%> (-1.71%) ⬇️
...is/tardis/plasma/properties/continuum_processes.py 36.99% <0.00%> (-1.49%) ⬇️
.../montecarlo/montecarlo_numba/single_packet_loop.py 27.11% <0.00%> (-1.22%) ⬇️
tardis/tardis/model/base.py 88.29% <0.00%> (-1.10%) ⬇️
... and 50 more

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 7a7d135...7f52f5b. Read the comment docs.

@tardis-bot
Copy link
Contributor

tardis-bot commented Jun 9, 2021

Before a pull request is accepted, it must meet the following criteria:

  • Is the necessary information provided?
  • Is this a duplicate PR?
    • If a new PR is clearly a duplicate, ask how this PR is different from the original PR?
    • If this PR is about to be merged, close the original PR with a link to this new PR that solved the issue.
  • Does it pass existing tests and are new tests provided if required?
    • The test coverage should not decrease, and for new features should be close to 100%.
  • Is the code tidy?
    • No unnecessary print lines or code comments.

@epassaro epassaro requested a review from DhruvSondhi June 9, 2021 18:30
@epassaro epassaro marked this pull request as draft June 9, 2021 19:45
@epassaro epassaro marked this pull request as ready for review June 9, 2021 20:33
@atharva-2001
Copy link
Member

@epassaro, could you please add my name too?

atharva-2001 aryaa_1@rknec.edu
atharva-2001 atharva-2001@users.noreply.github.com
Atharva Arya 55894364+atharva-2001@users.noreply.github.com
Atharva Arya aryaatharva18@gmail.com

@epassaro
Copy link
Member Author

@epassaro, could you please add my name too?

atharva-2001 aryaa_1@rknec.edu
atharva-2001 atharva-2001@users.noreply.github.com
Atharva Arya 55894364+atharva-2001@users.noreply.github.com
Atharva Arya aryaatharva18@gmail.com

what's your preferred email?

@atharva-2001
Copy link
Member

I'm sorry for the confusion, please add this email:

Atharva Arya <55894364+atharva-2001@users.noreply.github.com>

Copy link
Member

@wkerzendorf wkerzendorf left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I would then also include the ORCID check as well.

@epassaro
Copy link
Member Author

I would then also include the ORCID check as well.

I don't see any problem to keep ORCiD optional. The only difference should be names in Zenodo will not appear with the green "ID" balloon.

@epassaro
Copy link
Member Author

I'm sorry for the confusion, please add this email:

Atharva Arya <55894364+atharva-2001@users.noreply.github.com>

done

@wkerzendorf wkerzendorf merged commit a2ba04e into tardis-sn:master Jun 18, 2021
atharva-2001 pushed a commit to atharva-2001/tardis that referenced this pull request Oct 1, 2021
* add mailmap check workflow

* add another dhruv email to .mailmap

* sort mailmap alphabetically

* add atharva email adress

* more mailmap fixes
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants