Properly handle drafting being opt-in, fix private badge template #22
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
So I was completely wrong when I said this in #20:
Drafting was and remains opt-out (which does feel like the safer choice in general). This PR adds in
draft: falseto do what I meant to do with #20.I also managed to mess up one of the badge templates. For background, this repository intentionally has non-standard release workflows to ensure it uses the "current" reusables rather than re-cloning itself (like all other repositories have to do). In order to avoid confusion I named these workflows
internal-{verb}.yamlinstead of{verb}-release.yaml, but I've ended up confusing myself anyway.Regardless, the badge markdown template in the README now refers to the same workflow name as in the templates directory.
Checklist
This PR does NOT contain Protected Health Information (PHI). A repo may need to be deleted if such data is uploaded.
Disclosing PHI is a major problem1 - Even a small leak can be costly2.
This PR does NOT contain germline genetic data3, RNA-Seq, DNA methylation, microbiome or other molecular data4.
.png, .jpeg),.pdf,.RData,.xlsx,.doc,.ppt, or other output files.To automatically exclude such files using a .gitignore file, see here for example.
I have read the code review guidelines and the code review best practice on GitHub check-list.
I have set up or verified the
mainbranch protection rule following the github standards before opening this pull request.The name of the branch is meaningful and well formatted following the standards, using [AD_username (or 5 letters of AD if AD is too long)]-[brief_description_of_branch].
I have added the major changes included in this pull request to the
CHANGELOG.mdunder the next release version or unreleased, and updated the date.Footnotes
UCLA Health reaches $7.5m settlement over 2015 breach of 4.5m patient records ↩
The average healthcare data breach costs $2.2 million, despite the majority of breaches releasing fewer than 500 records. ↩
Genetic information is considered PHI.
Forensic assays can identify patients with as few as 21 SNPs ↩
RNA-Seq, DNA methylation, microbiome, or other molecular data can be used to predict genotypes (PHI) and reveal a patient's identity. ↩