Billy Keyes

As James mentioned, our bot for this is not open source because it makes too many assumptions about our internal Jira instances and workflows. However, you might be able to...

Thanks for reporting this. Bulldozer's update behavior is a known limitation (see #111), but given the potential for a flood of CI builds and the other confusing behavior (#128, #95,...

@jlewi this issue is about Bulldozer's ability to update PRs by merging in the target branch. Currently, that will only happen in one of three situations: 1) the target branch...

This would be nice (and policy-bot [has the same issue](https://github.com/palantir/policy-bot/issues/8)), but detecting when the bot is enabled is slightly involved. If you opt-in specific repositories via the GitHub App settings,...

After discussing this more internally, I don't think `policy-bot` covers all of the same use cases as this feature. As you highlighted in the workflow, you still need to add...

Thanks for catching this, @clakech. Since changing the configuration value is technically a breaking change, I'd prefer to update the documentation to match what the code does rather than the...

An alternative approach to this is to find a separate bot that converts comment resolution status into a commit status check that can be required using the existing Bulldozer features....

I think you can avoid race conditions by either making the "unresolved comments" check a required status check as part of GitHub branch protection (if you want it to apply...

Thanks for the example, I was thinking about how the bots interact when a new commit is pushed instead. I agree that only setting the status to `success` after approval...

That's an interesting idea. I'm not sure if GitHub treats apps with write permission as "maintainers" for the purpose of that option, but it sounds like it is worth testing...