[scaryclam]

The question is, why are you not just merging them into main as you go? It's a bit of a smell when you "need" to merge branches into branches. It shows a lack of safety and ease in deployments, which is the real problem to solve IMO.

[dontlikeyoueith]

Because sometimes there are changes that need to land as all or nothing.

[ninkendo]

Stacked PR’s… don’t do that though? They’re just PR’s. You can merge just the first one in the stack, and now it’s not “all or nothing”. Reading the docs, I don’t see a way to signal that the PR’s must all merge together.

Because the most natural way of saying “these changes need to land atomically” is called a branch, and landing it atomically is called a “merge”. But I guess GH’s UI sucks for reviewing large changes, so we’re stuck having to make each change independently mergeable and pass tests (likely disabling dead-code lints, etc) just to work around this limitation. Sigh.

At least when I actually do want changes to be mergeable in a stack, I now have a better UX for having folks review them.

[hambes]

because approval processes take time which i can use to keep working