On 24/03/16 14:28 +0000, Amrith Kumar wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Flavio Percoco [mailto:fla...@redhat.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2016 9:13 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
<openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] Bots and Their Effects: Gerrit, IRC, other

On 23/03/16 16:27 -0400, Anita Kuno wrote:
>Bots are very handy for doing repetitive tasks, we agree on that.
>
>Bots also require permissions to execute certain actions, require
>maintenance to ensure they operate as expected and do create output
>which is music to some and noise to others. Said output is often
>archieved somewhere which requires additional decisions.
>
>This thread is intended to initiate a conversation about bots. So far
>we have seen developers want to use bots in Gerrit[0] and in IRC[1].
>The conversation starts there but isn't limited to these tools if folks
>have usecases for other bots.
>
>I included an item on the infra meeting agenda for yesterday's meeting
>(April 22, 2016) and discovered there was enough interest[2] in a
>discussion to take it to the list, so here it is.
>
>So some items that have been raised thus far:
>- permissions: having a bot on gerrit with +2 +A is something we would
>like to avoid

To be honest, I wouldn't mind having a bot +2A on specific cases. An
example would be requirements syncs that have passed the gate or
trasnlations. I normally ninja-approve those and I don't really mind doing
it but, I wouldn't mind having those patches approved automatically since
they don't really require a review.


[amrith] I'm strongly against that in Trove (and I can see similar issues for 
other project that have guest images with python packages installed). I know 
that +2A for requirement patches wasn't the thrust of this email thread, but I 
just want to point out that in cases like Trove where there are guest images 
with requirements of their own, the patches with requirement changes have very 
material and consequential impacts and often get -2'ed while we can resolve 
dependent issues. And when some things like this have slipped through the 
cracks, very very bad things have happened.

This is a very good point that I was not aware of. As mentioned in my email to
Doug, my point is that I'm not against the concept of having a bot approving
some patches. I do see your point on this one and perhaps requirements approvals
was not the best example. :)

Also, I do think gerrit bots (or any?) should be a per-project decision. There's
no one size fits all. "Quod Erat Demonstrandum" given Trove's case.

Flavio

Flavio

>- "unsanctioned" bots (bots not in infra config files) in channels
>shared by multiple teams (meeting channels, the -dev channel)
>- forming a dependence on bots and expecting infra to maintain them ex
>post facto (example: bot soren maintained until soren didn't)
>- causing irritation for others due to the presence of an echoing bot
>which eventually infra will be asked or expected to mediate
>- duplication of features, both meetbot and purplebot log channels and
>host the archives in different locations
>- canonical bot doesn't get maintained
>
>It is possible that the bots that infra currently maintains have
>features of which folks are unaware, so if someone was willing to spend
>some time communicating those features to folks who like bots we might
>be able to satisfy their needs with what infra currently operates.
>
>Please include your own thoughts on this topic, hopefully after some
>discussion we can aggregate on some policy/steps forward.
>
>Thank you,
>Anita.
>
>
>[0]
>http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-infra/%23openstack-
>infra.2016-03-09.log.html#t2016-03-09T15:21:01
>[1]
>http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-March/089509.ht
>ml
>[2]
>http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/infra/2016/infra.2016-03-22-19.
>02.log.html
>timestamp 19:53
>
>_______________________________________________________________________
>___ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>Unsubscribe:
>openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

--
@flaper87
Flavio Percoco
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

--
@flaper87
Flavio Percoco

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Reply via email to