> I originally did that, but GitHub told me I could only have one personal and one bot account. If someone else registered the spark-mention-bot I'd be happy to switch it to that.
I have my own spare account for testing purpose (spark-test). https://github.com/spark-test I don't mind sharing it. Since at least people see some issues (+potential issues about false positive too) for the current status, I hope pausing it could be considered as an option for now. I see few things so far which should kindly be considered: 1. Some people actually could get annoyed by the automatic ping 2. Should reflect the resent changes (given Felix's https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/21928#issuecomment-409100200) 3. Activeness should be concerned 4. Blacklist the existing PMC (or add a rate limit) 5. Non-committers look not pinged given my observation 6. It is completely optional and it's rather something committer should regularly - this could imply we don't have enough active committers. 2018년 7월 31일 (화) 오후 2:12, Holden Karau <hol...@pigscanfly.ca>님이 작성: > The activeness is a thing that came up in the Beam project POC I'm doing > for the same bot (filtered it down to contributors active in the last year > only). > > On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 11:08 PM, Jungtaek Lim <kabh...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Sorry to chime in, just 2 cents on this since it looks like interesting >> topic. >> >> Just to share my habit as a one of contributors (for various projects), I >> don't take "git history" or "git blame" to find authors of file and ping >> for review. I just ping for active committers who recently merged the pull >> requests (as well as active contributors) for specific component, assuming >> committers don't merge the patches blindly so they have overall >> understanding of codebase for component. I guess it is not necessary for >> individual committer to cover whole codebase of a component, but ideally >> active committers for a component should be able to cover whole codebase of >> a component. >> >> In contributors' point of view, the main concern is who can be "merger" >> for my patch. 100s or comments from contributors would make code better but >> it doesn't make the actual change if at least one of committers who can be >> a merger jumps into the PR and reviews. >> >> I love the concept of leading existing contributors to review the >> codebase they know about. One thing which may be worth to also consider is, >> in open source project, it is very common for individual to (implicitly or >> explicitly) stop contributing the project for various reason, so concerning >> activeness (or date of commit) would be ideal. >> >> I admit above things might be ideal rather than realistic, but just think >> out loud to see review notification bot more useful for contributors and >> less annoyed for someone. >> >> Thanks, >> Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) >> >> 2018년 7월 31일 (화) 오후 2:46, Holden Karau <hol...@pigscanfly.ca>님이 작성: >> >>> On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 10:22 PM, Reynold Xin <r...@databricks.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I like the idea of this bot, but I'm somewhat annoyed by it. I have >>>> touched a lot of files and wrote a lot of the original code. Everyday I >>>> wake up I get a lot of emails from this bot. >>>> >>> We could blacklist the existing PMC (or add a rate limit)? >>> >>>> >>>> Also if we are going to use this, can we rename the bot to something >>>> like spark-bot, rather than holden's personal bot? >>>> >>> I originally did that, but GitHub told me I could only have one personal >>> and one bot account. If someone else registered the spark-mention-bot I'd >>> be happy to switch it to that. >>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 10:18 PM Hyukjin Kwon <gurwls...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> > That being said the folks being pinged are not just committers. >>>>> >>>>> I doubt it because only pinged ones I see are all committers and >>>>> that's why I assumed the pinging is based on who committed the PR (which >>>>> implies committer only). >>>>> Do you maybe have some examples where non-committers were pinged? >>>>> Looks at least, (almost?) all of them are committers and something needs >>>>> to >>>>> be fixed even if so. >>>>> >>>>> I recently argued about pinging things before - sounds it matters if >>>>> it annoys. Since pinging is completely optional and cc'ing someone else >>>>> might need other contexts not >>>>> only assuming from the blame and who committed this, I am actually >>>>> not super happy with that pinging for now. I was slightly supportive for >>>>> this idea but now I actually slightly >>>>> became negative on this after observing how it goes in practice. >>>>> >>>>> I wonder how other people think on this. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 2018년 7월 31일 (화) 오후 12:33, Holden Karau <hol...@pigscanfly.ca>님이 작성: >>>>> >>>>>> So CODEOWNERS is limited to committers by GitHub. We can definitely >>>>>> modify the config file though and I'm happy to write some custom logic if >>>>>> it helps support our needs. We can also just turn it off if it's too >>>>>> noisey >>>>>> for folks in general. >>>>>> >>>>>> That being said the folks being pinged are not just committers. The >>>>>> hope is to get more code authors who aren't committers involved in the >>>>>> reviews and then eventually become committers. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Jul 30, 2018, 9:09 PM Hyukjin Kwon <gurwls...@gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> *reviewers: I mean people who committed the PR given my observation. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2018년 7월 31일 (화) 오전 11:50, Hyukjin Kwon <gurwls...@gmail.com>님이 작성: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I was wondering if we can leave the configuration open and accept >>>>>>>> some custom configurations, IMHO, because I saw some people less >>>>>>>> related or >>>>>>>> less active are consistently pinged. Just started to get worried if >>>>>>>> they >>>>>>>> get annoyed by this. >>>>>>>> Also, some people could be interested in few specific areas. They >>>>>>>> should get pinged too. >>>>>>>> Also, assuming from people pinged, seems they are reviewers (which >>>>>>>> basically means committers I guess). Was wondering if there's a big >>>>>>>> difference between codeowners and bots. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 2018년 7월 31일 (화) 오전 11:38, Holden Karau <hol...@pigscanfly.ca>님이 >>>>>>>> 작성: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Th configuration file is optional, is there something you want to >>>>>>>>> try and change? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 7:30 PM Hyukjin Kwon <gurwls...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I see. Thanks. I was wondering if I can see the configuration >>>>>>>>>> file since that looks needed ( >>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/holdenk/mention-bot#configuration) but I >>>>>>>>>> couldn't find (sorry if it's just something I simply missed). >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 2018년 7월 31일 (화) 오전 1:48, Holden Karau <hol...@pigscanfly.ca>님이 >>>>>>>>>> 작성: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> So the one that is running is the the form in my own repo (set >>>>>>>>>>> up for K8s deployment) - http://github.com/holdenk/mention-bot >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 3:15 AM Hyukjin Kwon < >>>>>>>>>>> gurwls...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Holden, so, is it a fork in >>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/facebookarchive/mention-bot? Would you mind >>>>>>>>>>>> if I ask where I can see the configurations for it? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 2018년 7월 23일 (월) 오전 10:16, Holden Karau <hol...@pigscanfly.ca>님이 >>>>>>>>>>>> 작성: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Yeah so the issue with codeowners is it will only assign to >>>>>>>>>>>>> committers on the repo (the Beam project found this out the >>>>>>>>>>>>> practical >>>>>>>>>>>>> application way). >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I have a fork of mention bot running and it seems we can add >>>>>>>>>>>>> it (need an infra ticket), but one of the things the Beam folks >>>>>>>>>>>>> asked was >>>>>>>>>>>>> to not ping code authors who haven’t committed in the past year >>>>>>>>>>>>> which I >>>>>>>>>>>>> need to do a bit of poking on to make happen. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 7:04 PM Nicholas Chammas < >>>>>>>>>>>>> nicholas.cham...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On this topic, I just stumbled on a GitHub feature called >>>>>>>>>>>>>> CODEOWNERS >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://help.github.com/articles/about-codeowners/>. It >>>>>>>>>>>>>> lets you specify owners of specific areas of the repository >>>>>>>>>>>>>> using the same >>>>>>>>>>>>>> syntax that .gitignore uses. Here is CPython's CODEOWNERS >>>>>>>>>>>>>> file >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/master/.github/CODEOWNERS> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> for reference. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dunno if that would complement mention-bot (which Facebook is >>>>>>>>>>>>>> apparently no longer maintaining >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://github.com/facebookarchive/mention-bot#readme>), or >>>>>>>>>>>>>> if we can even use it given the ASF setup on GitHub. But I >>>>>>>>>>>>>> thought it would >>>>>>>>>>>>>> be worth mentioning nonetheless. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 11:17 AM Holden Karau < >>>>>>>>>>>>>> hol...@pigscanfly.ca> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hearing no objections (and in a shout out to @ Nicholas >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Chammas who initially suggested mention-bot back in 2016) I've >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> set up a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> copy of mention bot and run it against my own repo (looks like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/holdenk/spark-testing-base/pull/253 ). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If no one objects I’ll ask infra to turn this on for Spark >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on a trial biases and we can revisit it based on how folks >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interact with it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 12:24 PM, Holden Karau < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hol...@pigscanfly.ca> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So there are a few bots along this line in OSS. If no one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> objects I’ll take a look and find one which matches our use >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> case and try it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 10:33 AM Sean Owen <sro...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Certainly I will frequently dig through 'git blame' to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> figure out who might be the right reviewer. Maybe that's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> automatable -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ping the person who last touched the most lines touched by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the PR? There >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> might be some false positives there. And I suppose the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> downside is being >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pinged forever for some change that just isn't well >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> considered or one of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> those accidental 100K-line PRs. So maybe some way to decline >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or silence is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> important, or maybe just ping once and leave it. Sure, a bot >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that just adds >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a "Would @foo like to review?" comment on Github? Sure seems >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> worth trying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if someone is willing to do the work to cook up the bot. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 12:22 PM Holden Karau < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hol...@pigscanfly.ca> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi friends, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Was chatting with some folks at the summit and I was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wondering how people would feel about adding a review bot to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ping folks. We >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> already have the review dashboard but I was thinking we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could ping folks >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> who were the original authors of the code being changed whom >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> might not be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the habit of looking at the review dashboard. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Holden :) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Twitter: https://twitter.com/holdenkarau >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Twitter: https://twitter.com/holdenkarau >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Twitter: https://twitter.com/holdenkarau >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Twitter: https://twitter.com/holdenkarau >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>> Twitter: https://twitter.com/holdenkarau >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> Twitter: https://twitter.com/holdenkarau >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Twitter: https://twitter.com/holdenkarau >>> >> > > > -- > Twitter: https://twitter.com/holdenkarau >
