Skip to content

Drop 5-reviewer cap in upstream-release-docs#863

Merged
rdimitrov merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
drop-reviewer-cap
May 11, 2026
Merged

Drop 5-reviewer cap in upstream-release-docs#863
rdimitrov merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
drop-reviewer-cap

Conversation

@rdimitrov
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Description

The reviewer-assignment step in .github/workflows/upstream-release-docs.yml stops attempting assignments after the first 5 candidates. Combined with jq's case-sensitive alphabetic sort on the candidate list, this means contributors whose login sorts late (e.g. tgrunnagle, yrobla) get dumped into the "Additional release contributors" mention block on big releases without an assignment attempt — even when GitHub would have accepted them. On smaller releases the same logins land inside the first 5 and get assigned normally, so the same person appears as a reviewer one week and as an @-mention the next.

This PR drops the cap entirely and attempts every non-bot release contributor. The per-user attempt loop already isolates 422s, so removing the cap is safe — anyone GitHub rejects still falls through to the mention block. The mention-block copy is updated to drop the now-stale "review fatigue cap" wording.

The remaining cause of inconsistency — GitHub returning 422 for stackers whose only access is via the stackers team when called with GITHUB_TOKEN — is documented in the comment above the loop and will be addressed in a separate PR (likely by switching to a token with read:org).

Type of change

  • Bug fix (typo, broken link, etc.)

Related issues/PRs

Follow-up: replace GITHUB_TOKEN for the reviewer-assignment step with a token that has read:org, to reduce 422s on team-only collaborators.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

Attempt assignment for every non-bot contributor in the release range
instead of stopping after 5. The cap was systematically pushing
contributors whose login sorts late alphabetically (e.g. tgrunnagle,
yrobla) into the mention block without an assignment attempt on
larger releases, which surfaced as inconsistent reviewer lists from
one release to the next.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings May 11, 2026 14:44
@vercel
Copy link
Copy Markdown

vercel Bot commented May 11, 2026

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project Deployment Actions Updated (UTC)
docs-website Ready Ready Preview, Comment May 11, 2026 2:44pm

Request Review

@rdimitrov rdimitrov merged commit b18aab6 into main May 11, 2026
7 checks passed
@rdimitrov rdimitrov deleted the drop-reviewer-cap branch May 11, 2026 14:46
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview

This PR updates the upstream release-docs workflow to attempt reviewer assignment for all non-bot release contributors (instead of stopping after the first 5), reducing inconsistent behavior where late-sorting GitHub logins were skipped and only mentioned.

Changes:

  • Removed the 5-candidate cap in the per-user reviewer assignment loop.
  • Updated the contributor mention-block copy to remove the now-stale “review fatigue cap” wording.

Comment on lines 1041 to 1043
if [ -n "$MENTION_LIST" ]; then
echo "Release contributors we couldn't auto-assign as reviewers (review fatigue cap or GitHub rejected the assignment). Mentioning them so they see the PR documenting their work:"
echo "Release contributors we couldn't auto-assign as reviewers (GitHub rejected the assignment). Mentioning them so they see the PR documenting their work:"
echo ""
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants