Hi Etienne, Yes you could be as precise as you want. The paths I listed are just suggestions. :)
On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 1:12 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> wrote: > Hi, > > I think it's already do-able just providing the expected path. > > It's a good idea especially for the core. > > Regards > JB > > On 13/07/2018 09:51, Etienne Chauchot wrote: > > Hi Udi, > > > > I also have a question, related to what Eugene asked : I see that the > > code paths are the ones of the modules. Can we be more precise than that > > to assign reviewers ? As an example, I added myself to runner/core > > because I wanted to take a look at the PRs related to > > runner/core/metrics but I'm getting assigned to all runner-core PRs. Can > > we specify paths like > > runners/core-java/src/main/java/org/apache/beam/runners/core/metrics ? > > I know it is a bit too precise so a bit risky, but in that particular > > case, I doubt that the path will change. > > > > Etienne > > > > Le jeudi 12 juillet 2018 à 16:49 -0700, Eugene Kirpichov a écrit : > >> Hi Udi, > >> > >> I see that the PR was merged - thanks! However it seems to have some > >> unintended effects. > >> > >> On my PR https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/5940 , I assigned a > >> reviewer manually, but the moment I pushed a new commit, it > >> auto-assigned a lot of other people to it, and I had to remove them. > >> This seems like a big inconvenience to me, is there a way to disable > this? > >> > >> Thanks. > >> > >> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 2:53 PM Udi Meiri <eh...@google.com > >> <mailto:eh...@google.com>> wrote: > >>> :/ That makes it a little less useful. > >>> > >>> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 11:14 AM Tim Robertson > >>> <timrobertson...@gmail.com <mailto:timrobertson...@gmail.com>> wrote: > >>>> Hi Udi > >>>> > >>>> I asked the GH helpdesk and they confirmed that only people with > >>>> write access will actually be automatically chosen. > >>>> > >>>> It don't expect it should stop us using it, but we should be aware > >>>> that there are non-committers also willing to review. > >>>> > >>>> Thanks, > >>>> Tim > >>>> > >>>> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 7:24 PM, Mikhail Gryzykhin > >>>> <mig...@google.com <mailto:mig...@google.com>> wrote: > >>>>> Idea looks good in general. > >>>>> > >>>>> Did you look into ways to keep this file up-to-date? For example we > >>>>> can run monthly job to see if owner was active during this period. > >>>>> > >>>>> --Mikhail > >>>>> > >>>>> Have feedback <http://go/migryz-feedback>? > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 9:56 AM Udi Meiri <eh...@google.com > >>>>> <mailto:eh...@google.com>> wrote: > >>>>>> Thanks all! > >>>>>> I'll try to get the file merged today and see how it works out. > >>>>>> Please surface any issues, such as with auto-assignment, here or > >>>>>> in JIRA. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 2:12 AM Etienne Chauchot > >>>>>> <echauc...@apache.org <mailto:echauc...@apache.org>> wrote: > >>>>>>> Hi, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I added myself as a reviewer for some modules. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Etienne > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Le lundi 09 juillet 2018 à 17:06 -0700, Udi Meiri a écrit : > >>>>>>>> Hi everyone, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I'm proposing to add auto-reviewer-assignment using Github's > >>>>>>>> CODEOWNERS mechanism. > >>>>>>>> Initial version is > >>>>>>>> here: _https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/5909/files_ > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I need help from the community in determining owners for each > >>>>>>>> component. > >>>>>>>> Feel free to directly edit the PR (if you have permission) or > >>>>>>>> add a comment. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Background > >>>>>>>> The idea is to: > >>>>>>>> 1. Document good review candidates for each component. > >>>>>>>> 2. Help choose reviewers using the auto-assignment mechanism. > >>>>>>>> The suggestion is in no way binding. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>> > > -- > Jean-Baptiste Onofré > jbono...@apache.org > http://blog.nanthrax.net > Talend - http://www.talend.com >
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
