HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
chdsbd
kodiak
Python2019–2026
chdsbd / kodiak

kodiak

🔮 A bot to automatically update and merge GitHub PRs

4Distinct people
5Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
1.1KGitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

🔮 A bot to automatically update and merge GitHub PRs

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use has been verified yet.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 3:56:07 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by year5 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2019-11-20 16:41:38 UTC to 2026-06-01 02:51:46 UTC.

0122019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 0 submissions, 2 comments20192020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 1 submissions, 1 comments2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments20222023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2027-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 1 submissions, 0 comments. Incomplete calendar period.2026*

* An incomplete calendar period is marked with an outlined bar. Its count is not directly comparable with a full period.

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
20192019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC202
20202020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC211
20212021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20222022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20232023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20242024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20252025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
2026 (partial)2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2027-01-01 00:00:00 UTC110

What Hacker News says

5 sources
Hello HN, Kodiak is an open source GitHub app that can update, approve, and merge pull requests. At work we were getting frustrated waiting for CI to merge pull requests, so I built Kodiak to automate this tedious work. With Kodiak you don't need to wait for CI checks to finish, you simply add a label and Kodiak will merge your pull request when ready. It's super helpful when you have long running CI or "Require branches to be up to date before merging" configured via GitHub branch protection. It's really simple to get started: https://kodiakhq.com/docs/quickstart github repo: https://github.com/chdsbd/kodiak
In Show HN: Kodiak – a GitHub app to automerge pull requests
> If you insist on no errors on master ever you will kill throughput. There are a large number of automated tools which will help you prevent merging code that could break master: https://github.com/chdsbd/kodiak#prior-art--alternatives. The basic approach is to make a new branch from master, apply one or more commits on top of that branch, run the tests, and if tests pass, merge those commits (with fast-forward) back onto master. This makes it very difficult to get broken commits on master, as they have to pass the tests before. It is possible if you have a flaky test suite, but in my experience it happens very rarely, and is usually very easy to fix if something creeps in. In my experience, they speed up throughput, not slow it down, especially when you account for the disruption that merging broken code to master can be. https://graydo
Read the rest
n2.dreamwidth.org/1597.html has a good discussion of this: The Not Rocket Science Rule Of Software Engineering: automatically maintain a repository of code that always passes all the tests
In The Difference Between CI and CD

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.