See https://mail.python.org/pipermail/core-workflow/2016-February/000469.html and Ezio's follow-up (and yes, you can help :) .
On Wed, 10 Feb 2016 at 04:29 Maciej Szulik <solt...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 7:54 PM, Brett Cannon <br...@python.org> wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, 8 Feb 2016 at 13:11 Maciej Szulik <solt...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 5:07 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > On 7 February 2016 at 20:23, Maciej Szulik <solt...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> Talking from the position of owning a similar bot in OpenShift, I > quite > >> >> certain that it's really hard to have common base. Since these bots > >> >> address specific project and there are not two exactly the same > >> >> projects > >> >> with exactly the same workflow. I think what Nick meant to show is, > >> >> what we should target, more or less at least. > >> > > >> > It was a combination of a suggestion and a question. The suggestion > >> > was "Rust's automation UX seems nice, I think it would be desirable to > >> > target similar capabilities for CPython", the question was "Would it > >> > be feasible to collaborate on actual automation development?". > >> > > >> > It sounds like the pragmatic answer to the latter is "No, the > >> > additional coordination overhead isn't worth the potential pay-off", > >> > and I think that's fine - our respective communities can still learn > >> > from each other when it comes to our definitions of "What does 'good' > >> > look like?" in workflow design. > >> > > >> > Cheers, > >> > Nick. > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia > >> > >> I've also reminded one really handy solution described in the > >> presentation, > >> which is auto-assigning PR to the owner of certain area. With the list > we > >> keep > >> here: https://docs.python.org/devguide/experts.html we could pretty > easily > >> do such mechanism. This will be handy for the devs because assigning > >> a specific issue will trigger an email notification of such, which in > turn > >> is > >> similar to our noisy in bug tracker. Otherwise the PRs might end up > >> hanging > >> there until somebody will do that manually. > >> > >> Having said that Brett if you need help with it - I'm here to help you. > > > > > > :) Thanks. Once we have migrated the repositories over we can start > > discussing enhancements to the workflow like automatic reviewer > assignment > > (and I personally have some ideas about PR assignment as well for when > there > > isn't an expert). > > > > But I don't want to get too distracted by this bonus work when we haven't > > even started most of the work required to simply match our current > workflow. > > It's great that people are excited about making things better and I don't > > want to squash people's energy to help, but I also don't want to get too > > distracted by enhancements when we haven't even started a bunch of the > > minimum work to even move to GitHub, let alone take advantage of what > bonus > > features it will bring to the table. > > > > My current worry is that we are going to get blocked on Roundup work > because > > right now only Ezio and R. David know how that stuff works. Once the CLA > bot > > is finished I'm going to shift to helping with that, but it will > obviously > > go faster if others can also help with bugs.python.org work because we > can't > > switch over until we have a minimum workflow that matches our current > one. > > What's there to be done and how can I help with that, in that case? > > Maciej >
_______________________________________________ core-workflow mailing list core-workflow@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/core-workflow This list is governed by the PSF Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct
