Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

x/build/cmd/gopherbot: auto-Subscribe owners to reported issues based on directory #27586

Open
kevinburke opened this Issue Sep 9, 2018 · 7 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
6 participants
@kevinburke
Copy link
Contributor

kevinburke commented Sep 9, 2018

We now have an owners file which assigns various Gophers as owners/cc'd on issues for different directories.

It would be good to match incoming issues and auto-subscribe the relevant people, e.g. to do in an automatic fashion what @bcmills is doing manually here. #27524 (comment)

@gopherbot gopherbot added this to the Unreleased milestone Sep 9, 2018

@gopherbot gopherbot added the Builders label Sep 9, 2018

@mvdan

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

mvdan commented Sep 9, 2018

I assume this won't be done for the entire backlog of issues - it could mean hundreds of notifications for quite a few people :)

It would also be good if this was only done for issues that are still open after an amount of hours. Sometimes, issues are closed as invalid or duplicates after a few hours, and in those cases there's little point in pinging the owners.

Lastly: should this be skipped if any of the owners has already replied to the thread, or been pinged in it?

@agnivade

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

agnivade commented Sep 9, 2018

The challenge is to automatically figure out whom to ping from the issue title (which does not always have the package: prefix) and the issue body.

@josharian

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

josharian commented Sep 9, 2018

I think gopherbot should wait for the issue to be manually retitled. This also helps with the issue raised by @mvdan.

@kevinburke

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

kevinburke commented Sep 9, 2018

Lastly: should this be skipped if any of the owners has already replied to the thread, or been pinged in it?

I'm not sure there's an API for subscribing other people to issues so yeah my idea was just to have gopherbot mention the owners, which subscribes them, if they're not subscribed already.

I think if you are currently subscribed and then unsubscribe, Github is smart enough to know you shouldn't be resubscribed just because someone at-mentioned you.

I assume this won't be done for the entire backlog of issues - it could mean hundreds of notifications for quite a few people :)

Yeah agree that would be a bad idea.

@bcmills

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

bcmills commented Sep 10, 2018

I think gopherbot should wait for the issue to be manually retitled.

I don't think we need to wait if there is already a valid path in the title: folks who know to add the path prefix usually also have a pretty good idea which one.

@bcmills

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

bcmills commented Mar 4, 2019

Sometimes, issues are closed as invalid or duplicates after a few hours, and in those cases there's little point in pinging the owners.

I've been thinking about this a bit.

There's not much point in waiting if a human has already looked at the issue and decided that it is valid. In practice, the NeedsInvestigation, NeedsDecision, NeedsFix labels indicate that a human has looked at the issue, and WaitingForInfo indicates whether the human has decided that the issue is complete enough for further discussion.

So I would say that GopherBot should auto-add owners if:

  • the issue is still open, and
  • the issue is not labled WaitingForInfo, and one of:
    • the issue is labeled NeedsInvestigation, NeedsDecision, or NeedsFix, or
    • the issue does not have a Needs label, and has been open and without the WaitingForInfo label for some interval of time (one business day?)

CC @golang/osp-team

@bcmills

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

bcmills commented Mar 4, 2019

And we should probably only apply the “open and without label” condition to issues created after some epoch, or use a formula to limit the rate at which older issues are CC'd.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.