Skip to content

Conversation

@ethanrd
Copy link
Member

@ethanrd ethanrd commented Jan 8, 2026

Ping @cf-convention/info-mgmt for review an merge. Thanks!

* Going ahead with this and will have existing and new webpage running for an overlap period, then once happy website repo will no longer need to maintain vocab files.
* Review branch rules on GitHub repositories (do we want to add min review on PRs?) \+ to highlight no protection on vocab repo (only just realised this, I think because it’s newly added, happy to add protection if agreed \- FE)
* Fran to add branch protection on Vocabs repo \- just reviewed and realise this is a non issue that GitHub is flagging up, as only admin can delete anyway.
* Agreed no need for minimum review on PRs as roles cover merge ability
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This reads a little awkward from how I remember the conversation. I think we basically agreed that we did not need to implement any of the additional technical controls that github offers because the existing role permissions and internal processes already handle things. It's not that no minimum review is needed, just that one won't be enforced by github itself.

Copy link
Member

@sadielbartholomew sadielbartholomew left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good to me, other than @DocOtak's concern RE reviewing rules.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants