60 karma · joined September 3, 2013
The angle we took in the blog post focused on what was widely documented and accessible to the community (open-source tools like Bors, Homu, Bulldozer, Zuul, etc.), because those left a public footprint that other teams could adopt or build on.
It's a great reminder that many companies were solving the "keep main green" problem in parallel (some with pretty sophisticated tooling), even if it didn't make it into OSS or blog posts at the time.
That's why the OpenStack community built Zuul on top of Gerrit: it added a real gating system that could speculatively test multiple commits in a queue and only merge them if CI passed together. In other words, Zuul was Gerrit's version of a merge queue.
It does not seem GitHub merge queue supports this, but some merge queues do support this.
(Julien from Mergify)
(Julien from Mergify)
I definitely agree with your view on how pipelines can be different. I think none of our customers has something that is exactly the same. However, many of them don't have the workforce to build in house or even to optimize as far as you would do in a (very) large company.
(disclaimer: I'm from the Mergify team )
We move to GitHub to have a lower barrier of entry for new contributors.
It does support all the merging feature that GitHub provides. There are features request already to support even more merge methods. :)
That's why we started Mergify!
Now, it has a few more features to help automating workflows around pull requests, such as the ability to backport pull request to maintenance branches, delete merged branches, etc.
Feel free to try it out and let us know what you think!