I have created a bot that I hope we can use to host all non-CLA checks for a PR that isn't covered by CI: https://github.com/brettcannon/bedevere. To start, the bot would check for a bugs.python.org issue number and set a failing status if one isn't found, else link the status to the issue itself.
If the approach I took in the bot seems reasonable to people I will add support for a "trivial" label which would cause the bot to say the check is successful due to the fact that the PR is trivial enough to not warrant an issue to begin with. We can then continue to expand this bot to do other things like check that there is a NEWS file (unless marked as "trivial").
I don't want to role the CLA bot into bedevere since I created the bot in such a way as to be useful to other organizations on GitHub. So the Knights Who Say Ni will stay a separate repo.
On 1 April 2017 at 09:23, Brett Cannon brett@python.org wrote:
I have created a bot that I hope we can use to host all non-CLA checks for a PR that isn't covered by CI: https://github.com/brettcannon/bedevere. To start, the bot would check for a bugs.python.org issue number and set a failing status if one isn't found, else link the status to the issue itself.
If the approach I took in the bot seems reasonable to people I will add support for a "trivial" label which would cause the bot to say the check is successful due to the fact that the PR is trivial enough to not warrant an issue to begin with. We can then continue to expand this bot to do other things like check that there is a NEWS file (unless marked as "trivial").
+1 from me.
I don't want to role the CLA bot into bedevere since I created the bot in such a way as to be useful to other organizations on GitHub. So the Knights Who Say Ni will stay a separate repo.
Regardless of the practical details, I kind of like the idea of having the Knights as a grumpy bot looking for a shrubbery(/CLA), and Sir Bedevere as a happier, helpful bot that only complains when it gets confused by a lack of information :)
Cheers, Nick.
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 at 10:08 Nick Coghlan ncoghlan@gmail.com wrote:
On 1 April 2017 at 09:23, Brett Cannon brett@python.org wrote:
I have created a bot that I hope we can use to host all non-CLA checks
for a
PR that isn't covered by CI: https://github.com/brettcannon/bedevere. To start, the bot would check for a bugs.python.org issue number and set a failing status if one isn't found, else link the status to the issue
itself.
If the approach I took in the bot seems reasonable to people I will add support for a "trivial" label which would cause the bot to say the check
is
successful due to the fact that the PR is trivial enough to not warrant
an
issue to begin with. We can then continue to expand this bot to do other things like check that there is a NEWS file (unless marked as "trivial").
+1 from me.
And as a break from some political dealings I went ahead and implemented the "trivial" label support. So the bot is now coded to follow a pattern that I assume we will continue to use if we use this bot and add more status checks.
I don't want to role the CLA bot into bedevere since I created the bot in such a way as to be useful to other organizations on GitHub. So the
Knights
Who Say Ni will stay a separate repo.
Regardless of the practical details, I kind of like the idea of having the Knights as a grumpy bot looking for a shrubbery(/CLA), and Sir Bedevere as a happier, helpful bot that only complains when it gets confused by a lack of information :)
:) Yeah, I was very happy when I got the inspiration for the name since it seemed to fit rather well.
I have now done a test deployment of the bot to Heroku and it works! So unless I hear otherwise I will ask the infrastructure team for another Heroku app, move the code to be under the Python org, and then turn on the bot for the cpython repo. Since it's so easy to override I will make it a required check after we have lived with the bot for a few days to make sure it works as expected.
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 at 14:07 Brett Cannon brett@python.org wrote:
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 at 10:08 Nick Coghlan ncoghlan@gmail.com wrote:
On 1 April 2017 at 09:23, Brett Cannon brett@python.org wrote:
I have created a bot that I hope we can use to host all non-CLA checks
for a
PR that isn't covered by CI: https://github.com/brettcannon/bedevere. To start, the bot would check for a bugs.python.org issue number and set a failing status if one isn't found, else link the status to the issue
itself.
If the approach I took in the bot seems reasonable to people I will add support for a "trivial" label which would cause the bot to say the check
is
successful due to the fact that the PR is trivial enough to not warrant
an
issue to begin with. We can then continue to expand this bot to do other things like check that there is a NEWS file (unless marked as "trivial").
+1 from me.
And as a break from some political dealings I went ahead and implemented the "trivial" label support. So the bot is now coded to follow a pattern that I assume we will continue to use if we use this bot and add more status checks.
I don't want to role the CLA bot into bedevere since I created the bot in such a way as to be useful to other organizations on GitHub. So the
Knights
Who Say Ni will stay a separate repo.
Regardless of the practical details, I kind of like the idea of having the Knights as a grumpy bot looking for a shrubbery(/CLA), and Sir Bedevere as a happier, helpful bot that only complains when it gets confused by a lack of information :)
:) Yeah, I was very happy when I got the inspiration for the name since it seemed to fit rather well.
Sounds great! Thanks, Brett.
Mariatta Wijaya
On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 7:27 PM, Brett Cannon brett@python.org wrote:
I have now done a test deployment of the bot to Heroku and it works! So unless I hear otherwise I will ask the infrastructure team for another Heroku app, move the code to be under the Python org, and then turn on the bot for the cpython repo. Since it's so easy to override I will make it a required check after we have lived with the bot for a few days to make sure it works as expected.
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 at 14:07 Brett Cannon brett@python.org wrote:
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 at 10:08 Nick Coghlan ncoghlan@gmail.com wrote:
On 1 April 2017 at 09:23, Brett Cannon brett@python.org wrote:
I have created a bot that I hope we can use to host all non-CLA checks
for a
PR that isn't covered by CI: https://github.com/brettcannon/bedevere.
To
start, the bot would check for a bugs.python.org issue number and set a failing status if one isn't found, else link the status to the issue
itself.
If the approach I took in the bot seems reasonable to people I will add support for a "trivial" label which would cause the bot to say the
check is
successful due to the fact that the PR is trivial enough to not warrant
an
issue to begin with. We can then continue to expand this bot to do other things like check that there is a NEWS file (unless marked as
"trivial").
+1 from me.
And as a break from some political dealings I went ahead and implemented the "trivial" label support. So the bot is now coded to follow a pattern that I assume we will continue to use if we use this bot and add more status checks.
I don't want to role the CLA bot into bedevere since I created the bot
in
such a way as to be useful to other organizations on GitHub. So the
Knights
Who Say Ni will stay a separate repo.
Regardless of the practical details, I kind of like the idea of having the Knights as a grumpy bot looking for a shrubbery(/CLA), and Sir Bedevere as a happier, helpful bot that only complains when it gets confused by a lack of information :)
:) Yeah, I was very happy when I got the inspiration for the name since it seemed to fit rather well.
core-workflow mailing list core-workflow@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/core-workflow This list is governed by the PSF Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct
On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 4:23 PM, Brett Cannon brett@python.org wrote:
To start, the bot would check for a bugs.python.org issue number and set a failing status if one isn't found, else link the status to the issue itself.
If the approach I took in the bot seems reasonable to people I will add support for a "trivial" label which would cause the bot to say the check is successful due to the fact that the PR is trivial enough to not warrant an issue to begin with. We can then continue to expand this bot to do other things like check that there is a NEWS file (unless marked as "trivial").
This is a good idea. +1 to bedevere bot.
participants (4)
-
Brett Cannon -
Mariatta Wijaya -
Nick Coghlan -
Senthil Kumaran