On 6 March 2016 at 06:52, Brett Cannon <br...@python.org> wrote: > > On Sat, 5 Mar 2016 at 10:58 Georg Brandl <g.bra...@gmx.net> wrote: > >> >> Anyway, with the migration to Git it becomes much easier to spot and >> remind us >> of potential committers, as both author and committer info are retained in >> commits. This makes a periodic report (by a bot, presumably) possible >> that >> lists those authors with the most commits, but without commit bit. >> > > That's a great idea! Recorded in PEP 512: > https://hg.python.org/peps/rev/fad7b646ab06. >
Bonus points if the bot can figure out how many iterations the patch went through prior to being merged - when I've recommended folks for commit bits in the past, it's generally been because I've got to a point where I feel like I'm just rubberstamping their patches (rather than needing to suggest changes), so I can be confident they've worked out for themselves what "good" looks like. (Such a bot would be useful even without that though, as the folks actually reviewing and merging the commits would still be the ones to propose new contributors for merge privileges) Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
_______________________________________________ python-committers mailing list python-committers@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
