This is a good v0.1 approach. May want to make this its own abstraction for each souce control type (GitHub, Bitbucket, Gitlab, etc). Danger::CI::CustomCI::GitHub or (Danger::CI::Github::Custom and Danger::CI::Github::GithubActions) or something like that

@orta if you have any suggestions on this one or if I'm completely off-base please let me know. Thank you for your time on this codebase.

What is your actual goal with this? We already have some env vars for running a FakeCI in Danger I believe, and this code is effectively duplicating that

@orta I'm trying to utilize danger against an internal CI system that uses GitHub. Is this a possible use case?

The only thing I could find that relates to a FakeCI like you mention is a FakeCISource here that is used in testing to test local setup. If this is not what you meant, could you please link me to what you were thinking?

To be clear I'm not trying to mock the CI. I would still like danger to run against the PRs. Setting DANGER_USE_LOCAL_GIT to use LocalGitRepo does not work because that just causes Not a LocalGitRepo Pull Request - skipping "danger" run. to happen because validates_as_pr is false

There is a good chance I'm misusing danger and there is a better way to do this. Thank you for any assistance you can provide. Wanted to provide the PR in case there was not a current way. Cheers.

@orta bump

OK, yeah, I think this is reasonable - if you add the inline docs to the class (as it will show up on the site) I'm fine with merging it

Ran tests locally

Finished in 59.1 seconds (files took 1.14 seconds to load)
1240 examples, 0 failures, 2 pending

@orta added the inline docs and fixed merge conflict with CONTRIBUTING.md. Fixed typo in a spec and now they are passing locally.

@orta bump. Thank you for reviewing.

Shipped as 9.3.0