Great, thank you Robert!
Am Do., 31. Jan. 2019 um 16:44 Uhr schrieb Robert Metzger <
rmetz...@apache.org>:
> Sorry, I haven't been active in the business of merging pull requests
> recently. But you are both totally right: There is now a shiny big button
> for merging pull requests.
>
> Regarding
Sorry, I haven't been active in the business of merging pull requests
recently. But you are both totally right: There is now a shiny big button
for merging pull requests.
Regarding permissions for the bot: I'm going to ask Infra if the bot can
get permissions to label and merge pull requests.
I h
I assume he means that bots cannot do it, as they'd require committer
permissions. Same with assigning reviewers and such.
On 29.01.2019 13:09, Aljoscha Krettek wrote:
What do you mean by “merging cannot happen through the GitHub user interface”?
You can in fact merge PRs by clicking on the me
What do you mean by “merging cannot happen through the GitHub user interface”?
You can in fact merge PRs by clicking on the merge button, or “rebase and
merge”.
Aljoscha
> On 29. Jan 2019, at 11:58, Robert Metzger wrote:
>
> @Fabian: Thank you for your suggestions. Multiple approvals in one c
@Fabian: Thank you for your suggestions. Multiple approvals in one comment
are already possible.
I will see if I can easily add multiple approvals in one line as well.
I will also address 2) and 3).
Regarding usage of the bot: Anyone can use it! It is up to the committer
who's merging in the end w
Thanks for the clarification. I agree that it only makes sense to
check the points in order. +1 to add this if we can think of a nice
way to do it. I'm not sure how we would enforce the order with the bot
since there is only indirect feedback to a bot command. The only thing
I can think of at the m
The points in the review template are in the order in which they should be
checked, i.e., first checking the description, then consensus and finally
checking the code.
Currently, it is possible to tick off the code box before checking the
description.
One motivation for the process was to do the st
I played around with the bot and it works pretty well. :-) @Robert:
Are there any plans to contribute the code for the bot to Apache
(potentially in another repository)?
I like Fabians suggestions. Regarding the questions:
1) I would make that dependent on whether you expected the review
guideline
Hi Robert,
Thanks for working on the bot!
I have a few suggestions / questions:
Suggestions:
1) It would be great to approve multiple boxes in one comment. Either as
> @flinkbot approve contribution consensus
or by
> @flinkbot approve contribution
> @flinkbot approve consensus
2) Extend the last
I have the bot now running in https://github.com/flinkbot/test-repo/pulls
Feel free to play with it.
On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 10:25 AM Robert Metzger wrote:
> Okay, cool! I'll let you know when the bot is ready in a test repo.
> While you (and others) are testing it, I'll open a PR for the docs.
Okay, cool! I'll let you know when the bot is ready in a test repo.
While you (and others) are testing it, I'll open a PR for the docs.
On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 10:15 AM Fabian Hueske wrote:
> Oh, that's great news!
> In that case we can just close the PR and start with the bot right away.
> I th
Oh, that's great news!
In that case we can just close the PR and start with the bot right away.
I think it would be good to extend the PR Review guide [1] with a section
about the bot and how to use it.
Fabian
[1] https://flink.apache.org/reviewing-prs.html
Am Mi., 23. Jan. 2019 um 10:03 Uhr sch
Hey,
as I've mentioned already in the pull request, I have started implementing
a little bot for GitHub that tracks the checklist [1]
The bot is monitoring incoming pull requests. It creates a comment with the
checklist.
Reviewers can write a message to the bot (such as "@flinkbot approve
contribu
Hi everyone,
A few months ago the community discussed and agreed to improve the PR
review process [1-4].
The idea is to follow a checklist to avoid in-depth reviews on
contributions that might not be accepted for other reasons. Thereby,
reviewers and contributors do not spend their time on PRs tha
14 matches
Mail list logo
