+1
I saw the template of splitting the geode code. Can someone nominate a few
codeowners in the file as examples?
On 11/20/20, 7:32 AM, "Alexander Murmann" <amurm...@vmware.com> wrote:
+1
I agree with Owen's point that this will improve the experience for new
contributors. It also helps people new to the community to have confidence that
they got the type of review they need to feel confident to merge. I might get
to reviews that are both from great committers who can review for things like
coding style, test coverage etc. However, I might be unaware that neither of
them know the area I am modifying particularly well. This solves this problem.
I can merge with more confidence, once I got the review from the owner.
________________________________
From: Anthony Baker <bak...@vmware.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2020 17:55
To: dev@geode.apache.org <dev@geode.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Adding CODEOWNERS to Apache Geode
+1
I think we as a project will need to iterator on the code owners as well as
the process for code owners. But this is a model that has been adopted by a
number of OSS projects both within and outside of Apache. I like that it
provides visibility to PR authors and associates motivated experts to review
and merge changes.
Anthony
> On Nov 19, 2020, at 10:46 AM, Ernie Burghardt <burghar...@vmware.com>
wrote:
>
> Perfect, then let's give this a try.
> +1
>
> On 11/19/20, 10:45 AM, "Robert Houghton" <rhough...@vmware.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Ernie,
>
> DRAFT PRs do not get reviewers by default, but when the draft
transitions to ‘ready’, then the owners are requested to review.
>
>
> From: Ernie Burghardt <burghar...@vmware.com>
> Date: Thursday, November 19, 2020 at 9:56 AM
> To: dev@geode.apache.org <dev@geode.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Adding CODEOWNERS to Apache Geode
> Does GitHub allow us to limit this automated action to non-DRAFT PRs?
>
> On 11/18/20, 8:28 PM, "Owen Nichols" <onich...@vmware.com> wrote:
>
> +1 This will greatly improve the experience for contributors.
Instead of an intimidating empty list of reviewers when you submit a PR (and no
ability to add reviewers, if you’re not a committer), it will be great to
already have at least two reviewers automagically assigned.
>
> I have a small concern that initially populating this file via a
flurry of PRs may result in a lot of merge conflicts with anyone else that
volunteers on the same or an adjacent line. Also, since you _must_ be a
committer to be a code owner, is a PR even necessary…would directly committing
changes to the feature/introduce-codeowners branch be acceptable? If not, who
needs to review and who can merge the PRs against the ‘introduce’ branch?
>
> What happens if you are the only owner for an area, can you
approve your own PR? Even if the goal is two owners per area, does that mean
PRs by either owner cannot be merged if the only other owner is on vacation or
otherwise unavailable?
>
> Can we submit PRs against the ‘introduce’ branch now and they just
won’t be merged before Nov 26, or do we all just need to be patient until this
review period has concluded?
>
> From: Robert Houghton <rhough...@apache.org>
> Date: Wednesday, November 18, 2020 at 2:07 PM
> To: dev@geode.apache.org <dev@geode.apache.org>
> Subject: [DISCUSS] Adding CODEOWNERS to Apache Geode
> Hello Devs.
>
> I would like to improve the quality of the pull-request reviews we
see for
> critical parts of the Apache Geode project. In discussions with
other
> committers, a (not the) big hurdle to that is getting the right
eyes to
> look at a given PR. To that end, I propose the adoption of GitHub's
> CODEOWNERS functionality for the Apache Geode code repository.
>
> A discussion-document of this issue has been written up
> by @upthewaterspout. Thanks Dan!
>
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcwiki.apache.org%2Fconfluence%2Fdisplay%2FGEODE%2FIntroduce%2BCodeowners%2Bfile&data=04%7C01%7Czhouxh%40vmware.com%7Cdb988c7609e2457fa8ad08d88d697629%7Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0%7C0%7C0%7C637414831379830580%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=gd61vzFmopbgJg%2FRI1I%2BqMtbyEa1LrQOXJULV4D6hyE%3D&reserved=0
>
> I have tested the feature with fellow Geode committers
@upthewaterspout
> and @onichols-pivotal, and found it to meet our expectations.
Please
> review the document, and comment or reply to this thread, by 25
November,
> so we might start the task of nominating and applying for
ownership.
>
> -Robert Houghton
>
