Overall I'm supportive. It looks like there is also [prior art](https://github.com/jasonkuster/merge-bot) for an ASF project to do something like this (although it's not clear how that bot is run). There is also some mention of [preserving provenance](https://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=d...@community.apache.org&q=subject:%22Re%5C%3A+ASF+wide+policy+on+github%27s+squash+and+merge%5C%3F%22&o=newest&f=1) on the ASF mail archives (e.g. suppose the bot squashes and merges a branch of commits, but not all commits in the branch were authored or committed by the GH contributor).
There is also a question in my mind about who should be allowed to command the bot to merge. The prior art restricts this capability to committers only. I realize this seems like a bit of an annoyance...there are a couple reasons why I could see this being useful: - Suppose multiple committers have reviewed and one wants to approve the PR but not merge it until the others have looked the PR over. Traditionally we'd do this with a PR comment, but a merge bot couldn't distinguish the difference in this scenario. - Suppose we want to approve but hold a PR until another PR lands. In this scenario I usually just comment LGTM but don't explicitly approve, so people could just get used to that. But it means people do need to be a bit more intentional about approving things. Would be great to get some other feedback from the community about this. cc @junrushao1994 @tqchen @jroesch @kparzysz @manupa-arm @ramana-arm @Mousius --- [Visit Topic](https://discuss.tvm.apache.org/t/rfc-allow-merging-via-pr-comments/12220/4) to respond. You are receiving this because you enabled mailing list mode. To unsubscribe from these emails, [click here](https://discuss.tvm.apache.org/email/unsubscribe/59c3432be33bb9e3573791da42ad0dde419dcacff7f9f67331e5c198c2db3956).
