What's the burden if it's automated? I agree we should keep it simple for anything that has to be done manually.
Ismael On Tue, Apr 1, 2025 at 5:45 PM Matthias J. Sax <mj...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi, > > I understand the problem of a long "Reviewers" line and line break, so > breaking it down into multiple lines, one per reviewer make sense to me. > > I don't see much value in using all these other trailers personally, and > all the question about "when to add whom to which trailer" kinda backs > up that it might be unnecessary complex and confusing > > - committer/contributor who left a comment > - committer/contributor who hit "approve" > - committer who merged > - committer/contribute who co-authored > > Of course we can track this all very fine grained, but what it the use > of this information? In the end, if I really want to know who "approved" > a PR, I can go back to github and look it up. And I cannot remember that > I would have needed to look this up often. > > Would be great to get some clarification why such fine grained tracking > is useful. It puts a lot of burden on committers to fill this in > correctly (even if we try to automate it to the best extend possible). > > What actual problem are we solving? > > > -Matthias > > On 3/28/25 7:25 AM, Chia-Ping Tsai wrote: > > hi David > > > >> David Arthur <mum...@gmail.com> 於 2025年3月27日 晚上9:50 寫道： > >> > >> Commented-by: left any comment on the PR (any contributor) > >> Reviewed-by: did a full review on the PR (any contributor) > >> Approved-by: committer(s) who approved the PR > > > > If a committer leaves the comment without approve, he/she should be > included only by “Commented-by”, right? > > > > For another, is there a tool which can collect the name for > “commented-by” automatically? > > > > Best, > > Chia-Ping > > > > > >
