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

add CODEOWNERS file #200

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 10, 2017
Merged

add CODEOWNERS file #200

merged 1 commit into from
Sep 10, 2017

Conversation

emilgoldsmith
Copy link
Member

Just quickly setup a CODEOWNERS file as explained here. It's a pretty new feature I fell over this summer that I found quite neat and thinking about how we would for example want @zanemountcastle to look over @joaquinkunkel's css changes before it merged in etc. just made me think I'd quickly set one up.

@zanemountcastle if you could just take a look, if you see any typos feel free to correct of course, and otherwise if you feel something is off, like if I was too heavyhanded only putting me on lib or something like that just say so. Remember that this doesn't mean that no one else can review the PRs of course, it just means the PRs can't be merged (at least without admin privileges) without the code owner(s) having approved the PR, and it for example I guess would be nice for that to work for having you having to look at the styles folder or the main components folder, and me looking at all changes to db.js, falcorRouter etc.

Copy link
Member

@zanemountcastle zanemountcastle left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I like the idea of code owners for sure. It seems like a neat little feature.

My only concern is with the turnover of developers. Is the plan to make this so fine-grained that the junior engineers will be responsible for reviewing changes to the files that they create, or do you think it's best to only have the lead engineers as "code owners" and then change this file as necessary?

If it's only for the lead engineers, is the system we have now not enough where we both need to review PRs that come in?

@emilgoldsmith
Copy link
Member Author

Hmm, I think I mostly thought of it as lead engineers, or maybe junior engineers if they have proven themselves, but in that case they might be considered lead engineers anyway?

When you say:

If it's only for the lead engineers, is the system we have now not enough where we both need to review PRs that come in?

That's of course true, but my reason is also simply in agreement with what you said above:

It seems like a neat little feature.

And not really anything else, what this does is simply ensure that at least one (or maybe both in the cases where we are both owners, I'm actually not quite sure of the functionality) of us have reviewed the code before it can be merged. Right now I believe that in theory anyone also other than the two of us could approve a PR and then it would be eligible for review, so I just thought we'd add this quickly.

So yeah if you agree with this you can approve and merge it :)

Copy link
Member

@zanemountcastle zanemountcastle left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yep sure, that makes sense. :)

@zanemountcastle zanemountcastle merged commit 38ffdb3 into master Sep 10, 2017
emilgoldsmith added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 16, 2017
@emilgoldsmith emilgoldsmith deleted the feature/add-codeowners branch November 16, 2017 22:43
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.

2 participants