Just a note that for me, the main problem is that I get automatic review requests for PRs that have nothing to do with R (I think this happens when a rebase occurs that contained an R commit). Because that happens a lot, it means I miss actual review requests and sometimes mentions because they blend in. I think CODEOWNERS results in me reviewing more PRs than if I had to set up some kind of custom notification filter but I agree that it's not perfect.
Cheers, -dewey On Tue, Jul 4, 2023 at 10:04 AM Antoine Pitrou <anto...@python.org> wrote: > > > Hello, > > Some time ago we added a `.github/CODEOWNERS` file in the main Arrow > repo. The idea is that, when specific files or directories are touched > by a PR, specific people are asked for review. > > Unfortunately, it seems that, most of the time, this produces the > following effects: > > 1) the people who are automatically queried for review don't show up > (perhaps they simply ignore those automatic notifications) > 2) when several people are assigned for review, each designated reviewer > seems to hope that the other ones will be doing the work, instead of > doing it themselves > 3) contributors expect those people to show up and are therefore > bewildered when nobody comes to review their PR > > Do we want to keep CODEOWNERS? If we still think it can be beneficial, > we should institute a policy where people who are listed in that file > promise to respond to review requests: 1) either by doing a review 2) or > by de-assigning themselves, and if possible pinging another core developer. > > What do you think? > > Regards > > Antoine.
