Alex would you consider removing the descriptions from the labels? It seems that github greps not only the text of the label but also the text of the description producing false positives, e.g. if I search the label `io` it resolves not only all the IOs but also results like `core` because it matches the description `core-constructIOn-java` and also `extensIOns` making the point of having general categories not really useful.
On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 3:01 PM Ismaël Mejía <ieme...@gmail.com> wrote: > The prefix is just extra characters makes readibility worse, notice > that the full category (e.g. ios/runners/etc) will match because we have an > extra tag equivalent to the prefix, so filtering is still possible. you > rarely > need to filter for more than one criteria, that's why github does not > allow it > (and the reason to have the extra per category labels). > > The only issue i can see is a possible name collision in the future, but > until that > happens i think this is a reasonable tradeoff. > > Excellent idea to unifiy the colors for the categories +1 ! > > On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 2:33 PM Alex Van Boxel <a...@vanboxel.be> wrote: > >> Ismael, I saw that you removed the prefix. I still want to have some >> grouping between the subtypes, so I color coded them. >> >> I also added all the labels in the file. We now have 62 labels. >> >> _/ >> _/ Alex Van Boxel >> >> >> On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 12:03 PM Ismaël Mejía <ieme...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Forgot to mention, older PRs will look not classified, up to you guys if >>> you >>> want to do manually. All new PRs will be automatically labeled. >>> >>> On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 12:02 PM Ismaël Mejía <ieme...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> For info Alex's PR to suport autolabeler was merged today and INFRA >>>> enabled the plugin. >>>> I created an artificial PR to check it was autolabeled correctly. >>>> It is working perfectly now. >>>> Thanks Alex ! >>>> >>>> On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 5:23 PM Robert Bradshaw <rober...@google.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> +1 to finding the right balance. >>>>> >>>>> I do think per-runner makes sense, rather than a general "runners." >>>>> IOs might make sense as well. Not sure about all the extensions-* I'd >>>>> leave those out for now. >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 5:56 AM Ismaël Mejía <ieme...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> > >>>>> > > So I propose going simple with a limited set of labels. Later on >>>>> we can refine. Don't forget that does labels only are useful during the >>>>> life-cycle of a PR. >>>>> > >>>>> > Labels are handy for quick filtering and finding PRs we care about >>>>> for example >>>>> > to review. >>>>> > >>>>> > I agree with the feeling that we should not go to the extremes, but >>>>> what is >>>>> > requested in the PR rarely would produce more than 5 labels per PR. >>>>> For example >>>>> > if a PR changes KafkaIO and something in the CI it will produce >>>>> "java io kafka >>>>> > infra", a pure change on Flink runer will produce "runners flink" >>>>> > >>>>> > 100% d'accord with not to have many labels and keep them short, but >>>>> the current >>>>> > classification lacks detail, e.g. few people care about some general >>>>> categories >>>>> > "runners" or "io", but maintainers may care about their specific >>>>> categories like >>>>> > "spark" or "kafka" so I don't think that this extra level of detail >>>>> is >>>>> > inappropriate and in the end it will only add one extra label per >>>>> matching path. >>>>> > >>>>> > Let's give it a try if it is too excesive we can took the opposite >>>>> path and reduce it. >>>>> > >>>>> > Ismaël >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 1:04 PM Alex Van Boxel <a...@vanboxel.be> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >> >>>>> >> I'm wondering if we're not taking it too far with those detailed >>>>> labels. It's like going from nothing to super details. The simples >>>>> use-case >>>>> hasn't proven itself in practice yet. >>>>> >> >>>>> >> So I propose going simple with a limited set of labels. Later on we >>>>> can refine. Don't forget that does labels only are useful during the >>>>> life-cycle of a PR. >>>>> >> >>>>> >> _/ >>>>> >> _/ Alex Van Boxel >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 9:46 AM Ismaël Mejía <ieme...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> Let some comments too, let's keep the discussion on refinements in >>>>> the PR. >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 9:13 AM jincheng sun < >>>>> sunjincheng...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> I left comments on PR, the main suggestion is that we may need a >>>>> discussion about what kind of labels should be add. I would like to share >>>>> my thoughts as follows: >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> I think we need to add labels according to some rules. For >>>>> example, the easiest way is to add labels by languages, java / python / go >>>>> etc. But this kind of help is very limited, so we need to subdivide some >>>>> labels, such as by components. Currently we have more than 70 components, >>>>> each component is configured with labels, and it seems cumbersome. So we >>>>> should have some rules for dividing labels, which can play the role of >>>>> labels without being too cumbersome. Such as: >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> We can add `extensions` or `extensions-ideas and extensions-java` >>>>> for the following components: >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> - extensions-ideas >>>>> >>>> - extensions-java-join-library >>>>> >>>> - extensions-java-json >>>>> >>>> - extensions-java-protobuf >>>>> >>>> - extensions-java-sketching >>>>> >>>> - extensions-java-sorter >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> And it's better to add a label for each Runner as follows: >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> - runner-apex >>>>> >>>> - runner-core >>>>> >>>> - runner-dataflow >>>>> >>>> - runner-direct >>>>> >>>> - runner-flink >>>>> >>>> - runner-jstorm >>>>> >>>> - runner-... >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> So, I think would be great to collect feedbacks from the >>>>> community on the set of labels needed. >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> What do you think? >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> Best, >>>>> >>>> Jincheng >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> Alex Van Boxel <a...@vanboxel.be> 于2020年2月11日周二 下午3:11写道： >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I've opened a PR and a ticket with INFRA. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> PR: https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/10824 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _/ >>>>> >>>>> _/ Alex Van Boxel >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 6:57 AM jincheng sun < >>>>> sunjincheng...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> +1. Autolabeler seems really cool and it seems that it's simple >>>>> to configure and set up. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Best, >>>>> >>>>>> Jincheng >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Udi Meiri <eh...@google.com> 于2020年2月11日周二 上午2:01写道： >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> Cool! >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 9:27 AM Robert Burke < >>>>> rob...@frantil.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>> +1 to autolabeling >>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 10, 2020, 9:21 AM Luke Cwik <lc...@google.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>> Nice >>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 2:52 AM Alex Van Boxel < >>>>> a...@vanboxel.be> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Ha, cool. I'll have a look at the autolabeler. The infra >>>>> stuff is not something I've looked at... I'll dive into that. >>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>> _/ >>>>> >>>>>>>>>> _/ Alex Van Boxel >>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 11:49 AM Ismaël Mejía < >>>>> ieme...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> +1 >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> You don't need to write your own action, there is already >>>>> one autolabeler action [1]. >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> INFRA can easily configure it for Beam (as they did for >>>>> Avro [2]) if we request it. >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> The plugin is quite easy to configure and works like a >>>>> charm [3]. >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> [1] https://github.com/probot/autolabeler >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-17367 >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> [2] >>>>> https://github.com/apache/avro/blob/master/.github/autolabeler.yml >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 11:20 AM Alexey Romanenko < >>>>> aromanenko....@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Great initiative, thanks Alex! I was thinking to add such >>>>> labels into PR title but I believe that GitHub labels are better since it >>>>> can be used easily for filtering, for example. >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe it could be useful to add more granulation for >>>>> labels, like “release”, “runners”, “website”, etc but I’m afraid to make >>>>> the titles too heavy because of this. >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > On 10 Feb 2020, at 08:35, Alex Van Boxel < >>>>> a...@vanboxel.be> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > I've started putting labels on PR's. I've done the >>>>> first page for now (as I'm afraid putting them on older once could affect >>>>> the stale bot. I hope this is ok. >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > For now I'm only focussing on language and I'm going to >>>>> see if I can write a GitLab action for it. I hope this is useful. Other >>>>> kind of suggestions for labels, that can be automated, are welcome. >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > <Screen Shot 2020-02-10 at 08.31.09.png> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > _/ >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > _/ Alex Van Boxel >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>
