I will update labels only based on committer's approvals (for everything), I think that's cleaner.
We can always revisit this. On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 4:31 PM Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: > Fore code-quality/description I agree, but consensus and the final > approval should require a committer IMO. > > On 27.02.2019 15:08, Robert Metzger wrote: > > I did not put any restrictions on who can communicate with the bot! > But since there is currently no way of overriding somebody's approval for > something, this can easily lead to such a situation. > > My thinking was that a committer still needs to manually check who > approved a pull request, and I wanted to be open for non-committers to > participate in the review process. > WIth the labels in place, this can easily send the wrong message. > > What should we do? > A) we restrict sending commands to the bot to committers? > B) only approvals from committers matter for applying labels? > C) we allow committers to override approvals > > I'm leaning towards B, as it encourages non-committers to participate. > > > On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 2:01 PM Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> > wrote: > >> Just noticed that _anyone_ can approve a PR now, see >> https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/7801. >> >> Not sure about the solution, but as it stands it is rather trivial to >> nuke the review process of the entire project. >> >> On 13.02.2019 10:29, Robert Metzger wrote: >> > Hey all, >> > >> > the flinkbot has been active for a week now, and I hope the initial >> hiccups >> > have been resolved :) >> > >> > I wanted to start this as a permanent thread to discuss problems and >> > improvements with the bot. >> > >> > *So please post here if you have questions, problems or ideas how to >> > improve it!* >> > >> >> >
