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

Renovate naming convention issue #3703

Closed
echoix opened this issue May 11, 2024 · 2 comments · Fixed by #3716
Closed

Renovate naming convention issue #3703

echoix opened this issue May 11, 2024 · 2 comments · Fixed by #3716
Labels
CI Continuous integration help wanted Extra attention is needed
Milestone

Comments

@echoix
Copy link
Member

echoix commented May 11, 2024

I asked the other day on what was happening, and I got an answer today: renovatebot/renovate#28516 (reply in thread)

There's a hypothesis on what is going on, and an idea on how to fix it, but I'd like to know what you think we should use as naming convention for it. If we are going to work to tune the config to a very specific style to match the previous behaviour, we might as well choose any desired behaviour and do the change right now.

@echoix echoix added CI Continuous integration help wanted Extra attention is needed labels May 11, 2024
@echoix
Copy link
Member Author

echoix commented May 15, 2024

Could I get a little feedback on what convention to fix it with?

Or else I'll try to implement one, and maybe some changes to scripts that assume an exact suffix will need to be adapted if ever it doesn't look exactly as before.

@wenzeslaus
Copy link
Member

I tried to read through couple days ago and didn't get much out if it. If the convention is different, but distinguishable from what we use in general, then we can accommodate it in the procedure to sorting out PRs before a release. Obviously, consistency is preferable.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
CI Continuous integration help wanted Extra attention is needed
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants