chore: migrate to main branch #111
Conversation
google-cla
bot
added
the
cla: yes
product-auto-label
bot
added
the
api: iam
plamut
left a comment
plamut
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM, could not find any references to master, whitelist, etc. anymore apart from those in replacement rules.
BTW, when can we expect the code generator to generate the code using the main branch so that those replacement rules will not be needed anymore?
|
@plamut we'll sweep through the repositories first, then make template updates, then revert the replacement rules back. It shouldn't be long! |
|
OK then, although it feels like extra work. :) |
|
It is, but I think we're doing it so that we don't accidentally move stuff to the main branch and have things crash (template change sends 120+ PRs simultaneously), doing this slowly will ensure we don't break things along the way and minimize the impact as little as possible to prod, at the expense of some manhours which I think is affordable... maybe 😴 |
parthea
left a comment
parthea
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Minor observations, otherwise LGTM.
README.rst
Outdated
|
|
||
| .. |ga| image:: https://img.shields.io/badge/support-GA-gold.svg | ||
| :target: https://github.com/googleapis/google-cloud-python/blob/master/README.rst#general-availability | ||
| :target: https://github.com/googleapis/google-cloud-python/blob/main/README.rst#general-availability |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I get 404 with the new link
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Presumably this will resolve itself once that repo is migrated and the main branch is created?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It will, but to Tony's point we shouldn't let users see a 404. I'll have it reverted for now.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah, that's true, I thought the migration will happen simultaneously, but that's somewhat optimistic. 🙂 Tony is right here.
UPGRADING.md
Outdated
| In the 2.0.0 release, all methods have a single positional parameter `request`. Method docstrings indicate whether a parameter is required or optional. | ||
|
|
||
| Some methods have additional keyword only parameters. The available parameters depend on the [`google.api.method_signature` annotation](https://github.com/googleapis/googleapis/blob/master/google/iam/credentials/v1/iamcredentials.proto#L49) specified by the API producer. | ||
| Some methods have additional keyword only parameters. The available parameters depend on the [`google.api.method_signature` annotation](https://github.com/googleapis/googleapis/blob/main/google/iam/credentials/v1/iamcredentials.proto#L49) specified by the API producer. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I get 404 with the new link
samples/AUTHORING_GUIDE.md
Outdated
| @@ -1 +1 @@ | |||
| See https://github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/python-docs-samples/blob/master/AUTHORING_GUIDE.md No newline at end of file | |||
| See https://github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/python-docs-samples/blob/main/AUTHORING_GUIDE.md No newline at end of file | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I get 404 with the new link
dandhlee
added
the
owlbot:run
gcf-owl-bot
bot
removed
the
owlbot:run
3 participants
Thank you for opening a Pull Request! Before submitting your PR, there are a few things you can do to make sure it goes smoothly:
Fixes #110 🦕