Skip to content

chore: port policy YAML from previous default branch#17555

Open
reubeno wants to merge 1 commit into
microsoft:4.0from
reubeno:policy-yaml
Open

chore: port policy YAML from previous default branch#17555
reubeno wants to merge 1 commit into
microsoft:4.0from
reubeno:policy-yaml

Conversation

@reubeno
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@reubeno reubeno commented May 29, 2026

With the default branch switch from 3.0 to 4.0, we need to bring along the bot policy YAML.

As part of the port, I've added 4.0 branch/labels and also removed 2.0-era ones.

@reubeno reubeno marked this pull request as ready for review May 29, 2026 15:32
Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings May 29, 2026 15:32
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview

Ports the GitOps Policy Service “Resource Management” policy YAML onto the new default branch (4.0) so automated PR labeling continues to work across PRs targeting both 4.0 and legacy 3.0 branches.

Changes:

  • Adds a 4.0-targeted rule group that applies area/branch labels (including a 4.0 label).
  • Retains a 3.0-era rule group scoped to 3.0, 3.0-dev, and fasttrack/3.0 (and removes 2.0-era assumptions).
  • Adds/keeps an era-independent rule to label PRs opened by known bot accounts.

Comment thread .github/policies/resourceManagement.yml Outdated
Comment thread .github/policies/resourceManagement.yml Outdated
Comment thread .github/policies/resourceManagement.yml Outdated
Comment thread .github/policies/resourceManagement.yml Outdated
Comment thread .github/policies/resourceManagement.yml Outdated
Comment thread .github/policies/resourceManagement.yml Outdated
Comment thread .github/policies/resourceManagement.yml
Comment thread .github/policies/resourceManagement.yml
Brings over resourceManagement.yml from 3.0 branch, removes 2.0-era
branches, adds 4.0 branches appropriately.
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