+1 to generating the file. I'll go ahead and file a PR to remove CODEOWNERS
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 9:28 AM Holden Karau <hol...@pigscanfly.ca> wrote: > So it doesn’t support doing that right now, although if we find it’s a > problem we can specify an exclude file with folks who haven’t contributed > in the past year. Would people want me to generate that first? > > On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 10:22 AM Ismaël Mejía <ieme...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Is there a way to put inactive people as not reviewers for the blame >> case? I think it can be useful considering that a good amount of our >> committers are not active at the moment and auto-assigning reviews to >> them seem like a waste of energy/time. >> On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 1:58 AM Eugene Kirpichov <kirpic...@google.com> >> wrote: >> > >> > We did not, but I think we should. So far, in 100% of the PRs I've >> authored, the default functionality of CODEOWNERS did the wrong thing and I >> had to fix something up manually. >> > >> > On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 3:42 PM Andrew Pilloud <apill...@google.com> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> This sounds like a good plan. Did we want to rename the CODEOWNERS >> file to disable github's mass adding of reviewers while we figure this out? >> >> >> >> Andrew >> >> >> >> On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 10:20 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> >> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> +1 >> >>> >> >>> Le 16 juil. 2018, à 19:17, Holden Karau <holden.ka...@gmail.com> a >> écrit: >> >>>> >> >>>> Ok if no one objects I'll create the INFRA ticket after OSCON and we >> can test it for a week and decide if it helps or hinders. >> >>>> >> >>>> On Mon, Jul 16, 2018, 7:12 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré < j...@nanthrax.net> >> wrote: >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Agree to test it for a week. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Regards >> >>>>> JB >> >>>>> Le 16 juil. 2018, à 18:59, Holden Karau < holden.ka...@gmail.com> >> a écrit: >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> Would folks be OK with me asking infra to turn on blame based >> suggestions for Beam and trying it out for a week? >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> On Mon, Jul 16, 2018, 6:53 PM Rafael Fernandez < >> rfern...@google.com> wrote: >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> +1 using blame -- nifty :) >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 2:31 AM Huygaa Batsaikhan < >> bat...@google.com> wrote: >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> +1. This is great. >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 7:44 AM Udi Meiri < eh...@google.com> >> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> 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 >> > -- > Twitter: https://twitter.com/holdenkarau >
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
