These sound reasonable to me. When dealing with tags, my general encouragement is to ask: "Are these tags the fewest necessary to reach your goal?"
The hope is to balance avoiding potential 'tag pollution' while still providing the necessary information via tags. On 11/11/2017 01:23 PM, Mojca Miklavec wrote: > Something that would really help me in going through various pull > requests would be additional labels that would make it clear what > exactly is stopping us from merging that pull requests. > > > Some examples (tags could/should be further simplified): > > - needs_review: nobody with sufficient expertise took a look yet to > provide some qualified feedback > > - wait_for_maintainer: someone from our team thinks the commit is ok, > but would prefer to wait for the port maintainer to take a look first > > - more_changes_needed: the changes are not quite ready yet > > - wait_for_upstream_feedback: we would prefer if upstream would take a > look, or at least to get an upstream ticket open before merging the > changes > > - wait_for_opinion: there's still an ongoing debate, opinions > potentially differ, we need more brainstorming etc. > > I would like to apply some of these right away, but I would like to > get some feedback and opinions from others about some reasonable names > and reasonable set. > > Having those labels would hopefully help developers which happen to > have some time to go through PRs depending on current mood :) For > example, if we have a label "wait for maintainer" and 10 days passed, > look at it and commit it. If it's "more changes needed" and I'm not > willing to start debugging, skip, while for "opinion needed" I might > want to check while waiting for a bus even if I don't have my mac at > hand.
