On Sat, 5 Mar 2016 at 18:15 Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan@gmail.com> wrote:
On 6 March 2016 at 06:52, Brett Cannon <brett@python.org> wrote:
On Sat, 5 Mar 2016 at 10:58 Georg Brandl <g.brandl@gmx.net> wrote:

Anyway, with the migration to Git it becomes much easier to spot and remind us
of potential committers, as both author and committer info are retained in
commits.  This makes a periodic report (by a bot, presumably) possible that
lists those authors with the most commits, but without commit bit.

That's a great idea! Recorded in PEP 512: https://hg.python.org/peps/rev/fad7b646ab06

Bonus points if the bot can figure out how many iterations the patch went through prior to being merged - when I've recommended folks for commit bits in the past, it's generally been because I've got to a point where I feel like I'm just rubberstamping their patches (rather than needing to suggest changes), so I can be confident they've worked out for themselves what "good" looks like.

It's called a "synchronize" action for the pull request, so yes, it can be tracked. :)


(Such a bot would be useful even without that though, as the folks actually reviewing and merging the commits would still be the ones to propose new contributors for merge privileges)


Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan@gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia