Mention bot looks cool, as it tries to guess the reviewer using blame. I've written a quick and dirty script that uses only CODEOWNERS.
Its output looks like: $ python suggest_reviewers.py --pr 5940 INFO:root:Selected reviewer @lukecwik for: /runners/core-construction-java/src/main/java/org/apache/beam/runners/core/construction/PTransformMatchers.java (path_pattern: /runners/core-construction-java*) INFO:root:Selected reviewer @lukecwik for: /runners/core-construction-java/src/main/java/org/apache/beam/runners/core/construction/SplittableParDoNaiveBounded.java (path_pattern: /runners/core-construction-java*) INFO:root:Selected reviewer @echauchot for: /runners/core-java/src/main/java/org/apache/beam/runners/core/SplittableParDoViaKeyedWorkItems.java (path_pattern: /runners/core-java*) INFO:root:Selected reviewer @lukecwik for: /runners/flink/build.gradle (path_pattern: */build.gradle*) INFO:root:Selected reviewer @lukecwik for: /runners/flink/src/main/java/org/apache/beam/runners/flink/FlinkTransformOverrides.java (path_pattern: *.java) INFO:root:Selected reviewer @pabloem for: /runners/google-cloud-dataflow-java/src/main/java/org/apache/beam/runners/dataflow/DataflowRunner.java (path_pattern: /runners/google-cloud-dataflow-java*) INFO:root:Selected reviewer @lukecwik for: /sdks/java/core/src/test/java/org/apache/beam/sdk/transforms/SplittableDoFnTest.java (path_pattern: /sdks/java/core*) Suggested reviewers: @echauchot, @lukecwik, @pabloem Script is in: https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/5951 What does the community think? Do you prefer blame-based or rules-based reviewer suggestions? On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 11:13 AM Holden Karau <hol...@pigscanfly.ca> wrote: > I'm looking at something similar in the Spark project, and while it's now > archived by FB it seems like something like > https://github.com/facebookarchive/mention-bot might do what we want. I'm > going to spin up a version on my K8 cluster and see if I can ask infra to > add a webhook and if it works for Spark we could ask INFRA to add a second > webhook for Beam. (Or if the Beam folks are more interested in > experimenting I can do Beam first as a smaller project and roll with that). > > Let me know :) > > On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 10:53 AM, Eugene Kirpichov <kirpic...@google.com> > wrote: > >> Sounds reasonable for now, thanks! >> It's unfortunate that Github's CODEOWNERS feature appears to be >> effectively unusable for Beam but I'd hope that Github might pay attention >> and fix things if we submit feedback, with us being one of the most active >> Apache projects - did anyone do this yet / planning to? >> >> On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 10:23 AM Udi Meiri <eh...@google.com> wrote: >> >>> While I like the idea of having a CODEOWNERS file, the Github >>> implementation is lacking: >>> 1. Reviewers are automatically assigned at each push. >>> 2. Reviewer assignment can be excessive (e.g. 5 reviewers in Eugene's PR >>> 5940). >>> 3. Non-committers aren't assigned as reviewers. >>> 4. Non-committers can't change the list of reviewers. >>> >>> I propose renaming the file to disable the auto-reviewer assignment >>> feature. >>> In its place I'll add a script that suggests reviewers. >>> >>> On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 9:09 AM Udi Meiri <eh...@google.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Etienne, >>>> >>>> Yes you could be as precise as you want. The paths I listed are just >>>> suggestions. :) >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 1:12 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> I think it's already do-able just providing the expected path. >>>>> >>>>> It's a good idea especially for the core. >>>>> >>>>> Regards >>>>> JB >>>>> >>>>> On 13/07/2018 09:51, Etienne Chauchot wrote: >>>>> > Hi Udi, >>>>> > >>>>> > I also have a question, related to what Eugene asked : I see that the >>>>> > code paths are the ones of the modules. Can we be more precise than >>>>> that >>>>> > to assign reviewers ? As an example, I added myself to runner/core >>>>> > because I wanted to take a look at the PRs related to >>>>> > runner/core/metrics but I'm getting assigned to all runner-core PRs. >>>>> Can >>>>> > we specify paths like >>>>> > runners/core-java/src/main/java/org/apache/beam/runners/core/metrics >>>>> ? >>>>> > I know it is a bit too precise so a bit risky, but in that particular >>>>> > case, I doubt that the path will change. >>>>> > >>>>> > Etienne >>>>> > >>>>> > Le jeudi 12 juillet 2018 à 16:49 -0700, Eugene Kirpichov a écrit : >>>>> >> Hi Udi, >>>>> >> >>>>> >> I see that the PR was merged - thanks! However it seems to have some >>>>> >> unintended effects. >>>>> >> >>>>> >> On my PR https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/5940 , I assigned a >>>>> >> reviewer manually, but the moment I pushed a new commit, it >>>>> >> auto-assigned a lot of other people to it, and I had to remove them. >>>>> >> This seems like a big inconvenience to me, is there a way to >>>>> disable this? >>>>> >> >>>>> >> Thanks. >>>>> >> >>>>> >> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 2:53 PM Udi Meiri <eh...@google.com >>>>> >> <mailto:eh...@google.com>> wrote: >>>>> >>> :/ That makes it a little less useful. >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 11:14 AM Tim Robertson >>>>> >>> <timrobertson...@gmail.com <mailto:timrobertson...@gmail.com>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>> Hi Udi >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> I asked the GH helpdesk and they confirmed that only people with >>>>> >>>> write access will actually be automatically chosen. >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> It don't expect it should stop us using it, but we should be aware >>>>> >>>> that there are non-committers also willing to review. >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>>> >>>> Tim >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 7:24 PM, Mikhail Gryzykhin >>>>> >>>> <mig...@google.com <mailto:mig...@google.com>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Idea looks good in general. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Did you look into ways to keep this file up-to-date? For example >>>>> we >>>>> >>>>> can run monthly job to see if owner was active during this >>>>> period. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> --Mikhail >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Have feedback <http://go/migryz-feedback>? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 9:56 AM Udi Meiri <eh...@google.com >>>>> >>>>> <mailto:eh...@google.com>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Thanks all! >>>>> >>>>>> I'll try to get the file merged today and see how it works out. >>>>> >>>>>> Please surface any issues, such as with auto-assignment, here or >>>>> >>>>>> in JIRA. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 2:12 AM Etienne Chauchot >>>>> >>>>>> <echauc...@apache.org <mailto:echauc...@apache.org>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> I added myself as a reviewer for some modules. >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> Etienne >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> Le lundi 09 juillet 2018 à 17:06 -0700, Udi Meiri a écrit : >>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi everyone, >>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>> I'm proposing to add auto-reviewer-assignment using Github's >>>>> >>>>>>>> CODEOWNERS mechanism. >>>>> >>>>>>>> Initial version is >>>>> >>>>>>>> here: _https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/5909/files_ >>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>> I need help from the community in determining owners for each >>>>> >>>>>>>> component. >>>>> >>>>>>>> Feel free to directly edit the PR (if you have permission) or >>>>> >>>>>>>> add a comment. >>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>> Background >>>>> >>>>>>>> The idea is to: >>>>> >>>>>>>> 1. Document good review candidates for each component. >>>>> >>>>>>>> 2. Help choose reviewers using the auto-assignment mechanism. >>>>> >>>>>>>> The suggestion is in no way binding. >>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré >>>>> jbono...@apache.org >>>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net >>>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com >>>>> >>>> > > > -- > Twitter: https://twitter.com/holdenkarau >
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
