Either we keep OWNERS and have the review bot use them, or we remove them and use the reviews bot config as the single source of truth.
The bot is less likely to go out of date since it's at least active in how it behaves. I agree it doesn't necessarily solve the problem of things getting out of date, but other than inactive folks officially, actively bowing out of the project, I don't know there's anything we can do. IMO folks who aren't active but are still getting emails and review requests should be incentivised to redirect requests to new owners or at least active members. On Tue, Aug 8, 2023, 9:13 AM Alexey Romanenko <aromanenko....@gmail.com> wrote: > I’m generally agree with this (initially that was a good intention imho) > but what could be an alternative for this? Review bot also may assign > reviewers that are no longer active on the project. > > — > Alexey > > > On 8 Aug 2023, at 16:55, Danny McCormick via dev <dev@beam.apache.org> > wrote: > > Hey everyone, I'd like to propose getting rid of OWNERS files from the > Beam repo. Right now, I don't think they are serving a meaningful purpose: > > - Many OWNERS files are outdated and point to people who are no longer > actively involved in the project (examples: 1 > <https://github.com/apache/beam/blob/master/OWNERS>, 2 > <https://github.com/apache/beam/blob/master/.test-infra/OWNERS>, 3 > <https://github.com/apache/beam/blob/master/.test-infra/jenkins/OWNERS>, > there are many more) > - Many dependencies don't have owners assigned > - Many major directories function fine without OWNERS files > - We lack sufficient documentation of what OWNERS files mean ( > https://s.apache.org/beam-owners is not helpful and I couldn't find other > resources) > - We now have the review bot to automatically assign reviewers based on > areas of ownership. That has proven more likely to stay up to date. > > Given all of these, I don't see any obvious usefulness for OWNERS files. > Please chime in if you disagree (or agree). If there are no objections I'll > assume silent consensus and remove them next week. > > Thanks, > Danny > > >
