Andy Feller

@thor314 : thanks for opening this issue! 🙇 > gh --version > gh version 2.4.0+dfsg1 (2022-03-23 Ubuntu 2.4.0+dfsg1-2) https://github.com/cli/cli/releases/latest > > (that's about 2 years ago so this may already...

@Yethal : thank you for opening up this issue! 👋 **What branch of the repository is checked out within the GitHub Actions workflow?** `gh pr view` command examines the branch...

> I don't see how could it possibly not be right considering the fact that the behavior described in the issue occurs only for pull requests and only for users...

@nvincent-vossloh : thank you for opening up this issue! 🙇 After digging into the code a bit, I think I know where this is happening, which dates back to the...

@smaccona : thank you for opening up this issue for consideration! ❤️ **I think this is beyond the scope of what the GitHub CLI can and should tackle in this...

> If there is additional information/input I can provide, let me know. Thanks again! Sadly, @smaccona, I think you've provided plenty of information about the situation which I appreciate. However...

@smaccona : following discussion with Issues team, this scenario of issue transfer linking to commits merged with unrelated histories is potentially more complicated than it seems at cursory glance. Originally...

@gekkowrld : thank you for opening up this issue! 👥 **What `gh` use cases are creating commits/tags or merging changes that are not being signed automatically by your `git` configuration?**...

> After sometime, when the commit is mature enough I use `gh pr merge` which merges it to the `default` branch. I think this is where we reach an impasse...

@gekkowrld : you're welcome to continue the discussion when able. For now, GitHub does not support a scenario where GitHub or OAuth apps can sign changes as being described.