Got it. Thank you! Dongjoon.
On 2026/10/22 11:44:04 Hyukjin Kwon wrote: > Just to reduce any surprise, I set another bot to monitor the bot itself. > If it does anything wrong, it halts immediately, and removes/reverts > whatever was wrong. > > For committers, please directly remove the `ai-review-requested` label if > there seems anything wrong. That would make the bot stop too. > > On Thu, 22 Oct 2026 at 20:21, Hyukjin Kwon <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Ok .. I managed to enable the bots. Please try `ai-review-requested` label > > out (only commiters can do). and please let me know if there are anything > > suspicious or not working well 👍 > > > > On Tue, 20 Oct 2026 at 08:31, Dongjoon Hyun <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Thank you so much for keeping working and sharing the status, Hyukjin. > >> > >> Dongjoon. > >> > >> On 2026/10/19 21:50:36 Hyukjin Kwon wrote: > >> > update: I am still struggling / testing. `ai-review-requested` label > >> does > >> > not work for now. > >> > > >> > On Fri, 16 Oct 2026 at 07:05, Hyukjin Kwon <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > > >> > > headsup. I will stop the bot today. Will likely introduce > >> > > `ai-review-requested` label (only committers can set) to trigger the > >> review > >> > > most likely today for testing it out, see > >> > > https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/59502 > >> > > > >> > > On Mon, 12 Oct 2026 at 08:14, Hyukjin Kwon <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > > > >> > >> Another quick heads up. > >> > >> > >> > >> - I am basically stopping (or rather not posting) the reviews when > >> > >> there are no findings. > >> > >> - If there are updates from the author, the review will be > >> triggered. > >> > >> To minimize the cost, I am not setting the effort as max but > >> rather trigger > >> > >> multiple times whenever the author pushes a newer commit. > >> > >> - I am looking especially through P3 review comments or not. > >> Please > >> > >> let me know if you guys are getting too many P3 nits, and if that > >> bugs you. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On Thu, 8 Oct 2026 at 10:54, Hyukjin Kwon <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >>> Just quick headup, I am having some trouble with automation right > >> now. I > >> > >>> would need to test/run manually so it would be triggered like > >> everyday for > >> > >>> now. > >> > >>> > >> > >>> On Sat, 3 Oct 2026 at 01:53, Dongjoon Hyun <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> > >> > >>>> +1 > >> > >>>> > >> > >>>> Thanks, Hyukjin. > >> > >>>> > >> > >>>> Could we introduce a few safeguards for the new review bot? > >> > >>>> > >> > >>>> Specifically: > >> > >>>> - A GitHub label to opt out or disable the bot per PR. > >> > >>>> - Protections against excessive ASF Jira API calls. > >> > >>>> > >> > >>>> This would prevent the bot from being blocked/banned by ASF Jira > >> > >>>> and allow reviews to proceed even if Jira is down. It also helps > >> > >>>> manage worst-case scenarios where the bot leaves repetitive or > >> > >>>> unhelpful nitpicks. > >> > >>>> > >> > >>>> Best, > >> > >>>> Dongjoon > >> > >>>> > >> > >>>> On 2026-10-01 21:58 UTC Hyukjin Kwon wrote: > >> > >>>> > Hi all, > >> > >>>> > > >> > >>>> > I've been running a trial of automated AI code review on new > >> > >>>> apache/spark > >> > >>>> > PRs, and I'd like to share how it works and get your feedback. > >> > >>>> > > >> > >>>> > For now the reviews are posted from my own GitHub account > >> > >>>> (@HyukjinKwon) > >> > >>>> > while I check that it behaves well. Once it's proven, I plan to > >> move > >> > >>>> it to > >> > >>>> > the https://github.com/spark-test account, so the reviews are > >> clearly > >> > >>>> > separate from my personal ones. I plan to run this for the next > >> week. > >> > >>>> > > >> > >>>> > *What it does* > >> > >>>> > > >> > >>>> > Each review is a full, multi-pass review of the PR diff, run by > >> Claude > >> > >>>> > (via Claude Code). Findings are checked against the code before > >> > >>>> they're > >> > >>>> > posted. They're posted as a normal GitHub review: a short > >> summary plus > >> > >>>> > inline comments, each labeled with a severity, e.g. "Non-blocking > >> > >>>> (P2)" > >> > >>>> > or "Nit (P3)". Example: > >> > >>>> > > >> > >>>> > >> https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/59184#pullrequestreview-5379759787 > >> > >>>> > > >> > >>>> > *No LGTM, no approvals* > >> > >>>> > > >> > >>>> > - It never approves a PR and never posts "LGTM". Every review is > >> a > >> > >>>> plain > >> > >>>> > "Comment" review, so it doesn't count as an approval or a > >> change > >> > >>>> > request, and it has no effect on merging. > >> > >>>> > - If a review finds nothing new, it posts nothing at all: no "no > >> > >>>> > findings" or "all comments addressed" message. > >> > >>>> > - It doesn't push commits or edit anyone's PR. > >> > >>>> > - Human review and committer judgement are unchanged. Please > >> treat its > >> > >>>> > comments like any other reviewer's: feel free to push back or > >> > >>>> ignore. > >> > >>>> > > >> > >>>> > *When a review is triggered* > >> > >>>> > > >> > >>>> > - A new PR is reviewed shortly after it's opened. Draft PRs are > >> > >>>> reviewed > >> > >>>> > once they're marked ready for review. > >> > >>>> > - After a review posts findings, the bot waits. It reviews again > >> only > >> > >>>> > when the author pushes new commits. > >> > >>>> > - It also waits while a PR has open review comments from anyone > >> that > >> > >>>> are > >> > >>>> > newer than the latest commit, so it doesn't pile on while the > >> > >>>> author is > >> > >>>> > still responding to reviewers. > >> > >>>> > - Replying in a thread without pushing doesn't trigger a > >> re-review. > >> > >>>> > > >> > >>>> > *When it stops* > >> > >>>> > > >> > >>>> > - When a review finds nothing new. The PR gets a fresh review if > >> the > >> > >>>> > author pushes again later. > >> > >>>> > - When the PR is merged or closed. > >> > >>>> > > >> > >>>> > *Early numbers* > >> > >>>> > > >> > >>>> > Over the first ~12 hours (Oct 1), it covered 10 PRs, including 5 > >> > >>>> > re-reviews after the author pushed. It posted 7 reviews with 14 > >> > >>>> findings > >> > >>>> > in total, mostly P3 nits. Four PRs came back clean and got no > >> comment. > >> > >>>> > Several authors pushed fixes, and the follow-up reviews found > >> nothing > >> > >>>> > new. > >> > >>>> > > >> > >>>> > *Feedback* > >> > >>>> > > >> > >>>> > Please let me know if the comments are useful, noisy, or wrong, > >> either > >> > >>>> > here or on the PR. If you'd rather it not review your PRs, tell > >> me and > >> > >>>> > I'll exclude them. I'm also happy to adjust when it triggers > >> based on > >> > >>>> > what the community prefers. > >> > >>>> > > >> > >>>> > Thanks, > >> > >>>> > Hyukjin > >> > >>>> > > >> > >>>> > >> > >>>> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > >>>> To unsubscribe e-mail: [email protected] > >> > >>>> > >> > >>>> > >> > > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe e-mail: [email protected] > >> > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe e-mail: [email protected]
