> 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 Review bot also may assign reviewers that are no longer active on the project.
I propose that the reviewer bot be the full replacement, and I agree with Robert's comments about it being better at staying up to date. I don't think it is perfect, but I do think it's an upgrade over OWNERS. > 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. +1 - annecdotally I've seen this happen several times <https://github.com/apache/beam/commits/master/.github/REVIEWERS.yml>, but I've never seen it happen with an OWNERS file. On Tue, Aug 8, 2023 at 12:50 PM Robert Burke <rob...@frantil.com> wrote: > 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 The bot is less likely to go out of date since it's at least active in how 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 getting out of date, but other than inactive folks officially, actively 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 reviewers that are no longer active on the project.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 - Many OWNERS files are outdated and point to people who are no longer 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 >> >> >>
