It would be good to encourage participation of non-committers in the review process, so +1 for allowing everyone to operate the bot.
Github approval will show a green checkmark for committer approval (assuming accounts were linked via gitbox) - that should provide sufficient orientation? I just noticed that flinkbot seems to act as Robert when it comes to label management? I think that is confusing (besides earning Robert a lot of extra github notification mail thanks to participation on every PR :) Overall flinkbot is very useful, thanks for all the work on it! I heard positive feedback from other contributors, I think they see their contributions are better received now. Thomas On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 8:38 AM Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org> wrote: > I will update labels only based on committer's approvals (for everything), > I think that's cleaner. > > We can always revisit this. > > On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 4:31 PM Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > Fore code-quality/description I agree, but consensus and the final > > approval should require a committer IMO. > > > > On 27.02.2019 15:08, Robert Metzger wrote: > > > > I did not put any restrictions on who can communicate with the bot! > > But since there is currently no way of overriding somebody's approval for > > something, this can easily lead to such a situation. > > > > My thinking was that a committer still needs to manually check who > > approved a pull request, and I wanted to be open for non-committers to > > participate in the review process. > > WIth the labels in place, this can easily send the wrong message. > > > > What should we do? > > A) we restrict sending commands to the bot to committers? > > B) only approvals from committers matter for applying labels? > > C) we allow committers to override approvals > > > > I'm leaning towards B, as it encourages non-committers to participate. > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 2:01 PM Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > >> Just noticed that _anyone_ can approve a PR now, see > >> https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/7801. > >> > >> Not sure about the solution, but as it stands it is rather trivial to > >> nuke the review process of the entire project. > >> > >> On 13.02.2019 10:29, Robert Metzger wrote: > >> > Hey all, > >> > > >> > the flinkbot has been active for a week now, and I hope the initial > >> hiccups > >> > have been resolved :) > >> > > >> > I wanted to start this as a permanent thread to discuss problems and > >> > improvements with the bot. > >> > > >> > *So please post here if you have questions, problems or ideas how to > >> > improve it!* > >> > > >> > >> > > >
