On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 3:14 PM, Aaron Meurer <[email protected]> wrote:
> FYI you can sort pull requests by Travis CI status > https://github.com/blog/2014-filter-pull-requests-by-status. > That's where I got the idea to filter by passing tests. Coming to think about it, the label "PR: waiting for Travis to finish" is probably not necessary. One can quickly filter by status:pending to get those. > Aaron Meurer > > On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 3:44 PM, Sudhanshu Mishra <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> I am pretty sure that builds that time out eventually turn into the >> >> red or gray cross, don't they? >> >> >> >> They show "Errored" instead of "Failed". >> > I filter by "tests pass", more specifically "status:success". You are right that one should then look into other PRs that do not pass for whatever reason and help people out. The part where we help people doesn't change. The above workflow is for making sure that once the author makes sure that tests pass, we move forward quickly, i.e. clearly mark that it is his/her turn to do something "PR: needs more work (author's turn)", or I need to do something, i.e. review and either add "PR: needs more work (author's turn)" or merge. Also notice that I sort by last update. Again, this all ensures that people who submit PRs that are high quality can quickly pass review and get merged, in other word, that they quickly propagate through our huge PR queue. I am thinking of also adding "PR: in review" for huge PRs that require some time and multiple people to review, or require some kind of a decision to be made or a solution to be found. This label should be added for PRs that need review as well. Perhaps we can suggest a better name for label. That way, each PR is in one (and only one) of the following stages: * tests are in progress (the yellow status) * labelled "PR: needs more work (author's turn)" * labelled "PR: in review" * None of the above -- in this case it is a new PR and somebody needs to do the review and add a label Then we can easily go through our PR queue, label things and no need to worry anymore about a huge queue. In fact, we can keep PRs in there, because nothing will get lost, and we can easily filter using labels, so there is no issue and we do not need to close inactive PRs and open an issue for it. As a reviewer, here is the workflow: * go over all recent "PR: needs more work (author's turn)", and if the author did the work, flip the label (hopefully this can be automated with some script --- i.e. determining when the label was added and if any activity happened since then, and if so, the script can remove the label) * review all unlabeled PR * review other PRs, either with "PR: in review" or with tests still running Ondrej -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sympy" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sympy/CADDwiVD12LFLoutUvx4KZ5j%2B1Zt6ABmVA2i7HZNdeM28xf911g%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
