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

GitHub infra updates #13542

Closed
wants to merge 20 commits into from
Closed
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from 6 commits
Commits
Show all changes
20 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension


Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
28 changes: 0 additions & 28 deletions .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.md

This file was deleted.

86 changes: 86 additions & 0 deletions .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.yml
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,86 @@
# SPDX-FileCopyrightText: Copyright (c) 2023 NVIDIA CORPORATION & AFFILIATES. All rights reserved.
# SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0
#
# Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
# you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
# You may obtain a copy of the License at
#
# http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
#
# Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
# distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
# WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
# See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
# limitations under the License.

name: Bug Report
description: File a bug report for cuDF
title: "[BUG] "
labels: ["bug"]

body:
- type: markdown
attributes:
value: |
Thanks for taking the time to help cuDF and fill out this bug report!
- By submitting this issue, you agree to follow our [Code of Conduct](https://docs.rapids.ai/resources/conduct/)
- You also confirm that you have searched the [open bugs](https://github.com/rapidsai/cudf/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3Abug) and have found no duplicates for this request
wence- marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved

- type: input
id: version
attributes:
label: Version
description: What version of cuDF are you running?
placeholder: "example: 23.06"
wence- marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
validations:
required: true

- type: dropdown
id: installation-method
attributes:
label: On which installation method(s) does this occur?
multiple: true
options:
- Docker
- Conda
- Source

- type: textarea
id: description
attributes:
label: Describe the issue
description: Please provide a complete and succinct description of the problem, including what you expected to happen.
placeholder: XYZ occurred, I expected QRS results.
validations:
required: true

- type: textarea
id: mvr
attributes:
label: Minimum reproducible example
description: Please supply a [minimum reproducible code example](https://matthewrocklin.com/minimal-bug-reports) here.
render: shell
jarmak-nv marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved

- type: textarea
id: logs
attributes:
label: Relevant log output
description: Please paste relevant error and log output here
render: shell
jarmak-nv marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved

- type: textarea
id: env-details
attributes:
label: Environment details
description: Please specify installation info and paste the results from [print_env.sh](https://github.com/rapidsai/cudf/blob/main/print_env.sh) here
placeholder: |
+ Environment location: [Bare metal, Docker, Cloud (specify cloud provider)]
+ If method of install is Docker, provide `docker pull` & `docker run` commands used
+ Paste output from `print_env.sh` (linked above)
jarmak-nv marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
render: shell

- type: textarea
id: misc
attributes:
label: Other/Misc.
description: Please enter any other helpful information here.
35 changes: 0 additions & 35 deletions .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/documentation-request.md

This file was deleted.

64 changes: 64 additions & 0 deletions .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/documentation_request.yml
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,64 @@
# SPDX-FileCopyrightText: Copyright (c) 2023 NVIDIA CORPORATION & AFFILIATES. All rights reserved.
# SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0
#
# Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
# you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
# You may obtain a copy of the License at
#
# http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
#
# Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
# distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
# WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
# See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
# limitations under the License.

name: Documentation Request
description: Request updates or additions to cuDF's documentation
title: "[DOC]: "
labels: ["doc"]

body:
- type: markdown
attributes:
value: |
Thanks for taking the time to help cuDF and improve our documentation!
- By submitting this issue, you agree to follow our [Code of Conduct](https://docs.rapids.ai/resources/conduct/)
- You also confirm that you have searched the [open documentation issues](https://github.com/rapidsai/cudf/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3Adoc) and have found no duplicates for this request
jarmak-nv marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved

- type: dropdown
id: criticality
attributes:
label: How would you describe the priority of this documentation request?
options:
- Critical (currently preventing usage)
- Medium
- Low (would be nice)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is fuzzy to me -- and thus potentially a source of friction for issue filers. "Critical documentation fix" feels like a bit of a contradiction to me. Do others think this field is helpful/necessary?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

rapidsai/cuml#5252 is an example of a critical doc issue imo, but happy to remove this dropdown if the team doesn't find value in it.

The intention of these dropdowns is to allow the user to directly tell us how important they feel something is so we don't need to intuit it. If it costs us more than it benefits us, then that's not great and should be removed.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

My feeling is that this more likely than not to just cause annoyance. We are going to triage importance anyway and if we decide that, in our estimation, a user's "critical" issue is in fact low priority what then?

validations:
required: true

- type: dropdown
id: new_or_correction
attributes:
label: Is this for new documentation, or an update to existing docs?
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is fuzzy to me -- and thus potentially a source of friction for issue filers. If a function is undocumented, that's probably "new." But is an undocumented keyword for an existing function argument supposed to be "new" or "update"?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In the interest of not rocking the boat, we could use the existing template wording of incorrect or needed if that's preferable.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Does it matter whether the request is for "new" or "update" from the point of view of the reporter? It might matter for us, but that is an internal "implementation" detail.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think it matters to both parties - it frames the issue with minimal effort (2 mouse clicks). It also lets the user know what we expect of them since the expected responses in the downstream text boxes are conditional (if only the form could be conditional) based on if it's new or an update. (or incorrect vs needed).

Copy link
Contributor

@GregoryKimball GregoryKimball Jun 29, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I would like to remove this dropdown. As a filer, I don't think it adds enough value for the 2 click friction. I updated my feedback in my main review comment

options:
- New
- Update
validations:
required: true

- type: textarea
id: problem
attributes:
label: Describe the incorrect/future/missing documentation
jarmak-nv marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
placeholder: "Example: A code snippet mentions function foo(args) but I cannot find any documentation on it."
validations:
required: true

- type: textarea
id: search_locs
attributes:
label: If this is a correction, please provide a link to the incorrect documentation. If this is a new documentation request, please link to where you have looked.
placeholder: |
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This placeholder isn't helpful because you can't copy the link. Can you link this in the label field and remove the placeholder?

https://docs.rapids.ai/api/cudf/stable/ and
https://docs.rapids.ai/api/cudf/nightly
jarmak-nv marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
20 changes: 0 additions & 20 deletions .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/feature_request.md

This file was deleted.

70 changes: 70 additions & 0 deletions .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/feature_request.yml
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,70 @@
# SPDX-FileCopyrightText: Copyright (c) 2023 NVIDIA CORPORATION & AFFILIATES. All rights reserved.
# SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0
#
# Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
# you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
# You may obtain a copy of the License at
#
# http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
#
# Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
# distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
# WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
# See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
# limitations under the License.

name: Feature Request
description: Request new or improved functionality or changes to existing cuDF functionality
title: "[FEA] "
labels: ["feature request"]

body:
- type: markdown
attributes:
value: |
Thanks for taking the time to help cuDF and fill out this feature request!
- By submitting this issue, you agree to follow our [Code of Conduct](https://docs.rapids.ai/resources/conduct/)
- You also confirm that you have searched the [open feature requests](https://github.com/rapidsai/cudf/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3A%22feature+request%22%2Cimprovement%2Cenhancement) and have found no duplicates for this request

- type: dropdown
id: new_or_improvement
attributes:
label: Is this a new feature, an improvement, or a change to existing functionality?
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Label does not match the options (missing "change to existing functionality").

options:
- New Feature
- Improvement
- Change
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We don't currently track the differences here -- we have to label all of these things as improvement for the label checker. I think the difference is often fuzzy and thus a potential source of friction for the person filing an issue.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The label checker does differentiate between feature request and improvement which to me indicates the difference between New vs Improvement, but agree it's not captured in Change.

Intention here is to help the team recognize if a user is asking for a change to how things work vs just an addition. It's a focusing tool, but if it doesn't help, as with the other things, happy to remove!

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

TIL that the "feature request" label exists for PRs and not just issues. 👍 Thus far I have always marked "improvement."

I'm totally happy to keep or drop most of these questions, I just want to minimize the form length and maximize the value added!

validations:
required: true

- type: dropdown
id: criticality
attributes:
label: How would you describe the priority of this feature request?
options:
- Critical (currently preventing usage)
- Medium
- Low (would be nice)
wence- marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
validations:
required: true

- type: textarea
id: problem
attributes:
label: Please provide a clear description of problem you would like to solve.
description: Real usage examples are especially helpful. If there is an existing function you use in a different library, please also provide a link.
validations:
required: true

- type: textarea
id: alternatives
attributes:
label: Describe any alternatives you have considered.
description: List any other libraries, or approaches you have looked at or tried.
jarmak-nv marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
placeholder: I have looked at library XYZ and QRS, but they do not offer GPU acceleration.
jarmak-nv marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved

- type: textarea
id: misc
attributes:
label: Additional context
description: Add any other context, code examples, or references to existing implementations about the feature request here.
jarmak-nv marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
20 changes: 0 additions & 20 deletions .github/workflows/add_to_project.yml

This file was deleted.

45 changes: 45 additions & 0 deletions .github/workflows/external-issue-labeler.yml
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
# SPDX-FileCopyrightText: Copyright (c) 2023, NVIDIA CORPORATION & AFFILIATES. All rights reserved.
# SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0
#
# Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
# you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
# You may obtain a copy of the License at
#
# http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
#
# Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
# distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
# WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
# See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
# limitations under the License.

name: Triage outside issues

on:
issues:
types:
- opened

env:
GITHUB_TOKEN: ${{ secrets.ISSUE_PR_WRITE_GITHUB_TOKEN }}

jobs:
Label-Issue:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
# Only run if the issue author is not part of RAPIDS
if: ${{ ! contains(fromJSON('["OWNER", "MEMBER", "CONTRIBUTOR", "COLLABORATOR"]'), github.event.issue.author_association)}}
steps:
- name: add-external-labels
run: |
issue_url=${{ github.event.issue.html_url }}
gh issue edit ${issue_url} --add-label "Needs Triage,External"

- name: add-comment-to-issue
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Personally I am not in favor of autoresponders if their text is so simple. It adds noise to the conversation that I don't think is helpful. If it were "smart" and pointed to a contributing guide for the relevant component (libcudf/cudf Python) or linked to potentially related issues, then perhaps.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Agree in that auto-responders are not my favorite. Unfortunately for the Slack integrations to notify us it requires a triggering event, and that's only either Issue creation, or comment. Since the GHA to label happens after issue creation, we need to make the comment to have it fire.

I think we could have the GHA delete the comment immediately after posting, but that might fire some confusing emails to filers.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What Slack integration are you talking about? I already get GitHub notifications via Slack for every new issue that is filed.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Part of a new process to track/triage External issues easier. https://github.com/integrations/slack#creating-a-filter when issues with External exist they can go into specific channels to ensure timely response/handling.

The goal is to reduce noise of all issues/comments and only focus on a small subset.

run: |
issue_url=${{ github.event.issue.html_url }}
author=${{ github.event.issue.user.login }}
echo ${author}
gh issue comment ${issue_url} --body "Hi @${author}!

Thanks for submitting this issue - our team has been notified and we'll get back to you as soon as we can!
In the meantime, feel free to add any relevant information to this issue."
Loading