Re: [infinispan-dev] PR labels
On 12/01/2017 10:04 AM, Radim Vansa wrote:
On 12/01/2017 09:26 AM, Tristan Tarrant wrote:
> Hello people,
>
> I'd like to rationalize the PR labels because I believe some of them are
> useless:
>
> [Ready for review] - Any PR without the [Preview] label must fall under
> this category
> [Backport] - The burden should be on the PR owner to create relevant
> backport PRs, not on the reviewer
I think that [Backport] means that this is already in upstream, and
therefore review should be mostly formal (not breaking APIs but not
"this could be done 1% better.
Hit send too fast... The complexity of a review indicates time spent
with the review; I'd expect a backport review to be a 15 minute job, not
2 hour one, so when looking for a appetizer before lunch these are
on-sight good candidates.
Also it is a second warning for reviewer that this shouldn't be
cherry-picked on master (when merging from cmdline).
> [Wait CI Results] - PRs should only be integrated after a successful CI
> run (or when failures can be proven to be pre-existing)
> [Check CI Failures!] - The CI runs already add failure/success to the PR
> status. Checking CI failures should apply to ALL PRs.
> [On Ice] PR should be closed and reopened when relevant again.
>
> Comments/suggestions ?
>
> Tristan
--
Radim Vansa <rvansa(a)redhat.com>
JBoss Performance Team