Update mergify with new 9.1 branch

[donoghuc]

Update mergify data to add the newly created 9.1 branch

[github-actions]

🤖 GitHub comments

Expand to view the GitHub comments

Just comment with:

• run docs-build : Re-trigger the docs validation. (use unformatted text in the comment!)

[mergify]

This pull request does not have a backport label. Could you fix it @donoghuc? 🙏
To fixup this pull request, you need to add the backport labels for the needed
branches, such as:

• backport-8./d is the label to automatically backport to the 8./d branch. /d is the digit.
• If no backport is necessary, please add the backport-skip label

[donoghuc]

Codereview: Why does the 8.19 section look different than the other?

[robbavey]

Looks like the template was simplified by @v1v when 8.19 support was added, https://github.com/elastic/logstash/pull/17567/files

[v1v]

#17551 introduced the defaults, so those specific config entries per backport pull_request rule is not needed anymore.

[v1v]

#17742 is the one removing those duplicated entries

[v1v]

I recall, I enabled some automation when a new minor was created at https://github.com/elastic/logstash/pull/16937/files#diff-9c6b820333e02ae31783c38a5a6b83e6adb6bfcdaaee16b451090b8cedf618a9R63

However, I think https://github.com/elastic/logstash/actions/runs/15888662997/job/44806654871#step:13:1 failed as it used 8.19. I wonder If using 9.1 likely this PR should have been created?

[donoghuc]

However, I think https://github.com/elastic/logstash/actions/runs/15888662997/job/44806654871#step:13:1 failed as it used 8.19. I wonder If using 9.1 likely this PR should have been created?

Ah, i actually didnt run that job for 9.1. I (I updated the lock file directly). Good to know that is part of that workflow. I'll just do this one manualy.