[Pulp-dev] Pulp Code Owners

[Kersom]

Using the tests for Pulp 3 as example, since the code basis is hosted in
Pulp repos, I think that could be created a QE group to be involved in any
new code changes related to the tests.

My suggestion is at least one QE person should review changes to the code
basis related to the tests. This will help us later on to assure that a
test should behave in a certain way and that certain feature was already
tested.

But I guess that discussion going on here is more broad.




On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 12:36 PM, David Davis <daviddavis at redhat.com> wrote:

> Doing some research on code owners, I found[0] that I was wrong in that
> code owners have to have the commit bit:
>
> *The people you choose as code owners must have write permissions for the
> repository.*
>
> I think this makes the code owners feature less useful to us. More
> importantly though, it means that we need to have a way for people to
> obtain the commit bit before they can become code owners.
>
> I’d propose that we table this discussion for now and instead focus on the
> process for obtaining the commit bit. @ipanova is working on a new draft of
> the commit bit PUP.
>
> [0] https://help.github.com/articles/about-codeowners/
>
> David
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 8:58 PM Bryan Kearney <bkearney at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> On 08/14/2018 11:00 AM, Milan Kovacik wrote:
>> > hard unless the SME (and/or commit bit ownership) status is tied
>> > formally to review quality and rate.
>> >
>> I can see nagging the owners, but doing reviews of other parts of code
>> you dont know is a great way to (1) Learn it and (2) help the project.
>>
>> -- bk
>>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Pulp-dev mailing list
> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20180815/fcffdfa4/attachment.htm>