[core-workflow] My initial thoughts on the steps/blockers of the transition

[Zachary Ware]

On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 1:19 PM, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Jan 2016 at 11:05 Zachary Ware <zachary.ware+pydev at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 12:40 PM, Ezio Melotti <ezio.melotti at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > We can also try to do something smarter by checking e.g. every 15
>> > minutes and posting the message only if no new messages have been
>> > added in the last 15 minutes (so the reviewer has likely finished
>> > commenting).
>>
>> I like this plan, though 15 minutes might be a bit short for the
>> cooldown period; half an hour might be a bit better.  On the other
>> hand, it is possible to write out all your review comments without
>> hitting the 'comment' button on any of them, then scroll through and
>> click comment on each of them, in which case the cooldown could be
>> even shorter than 15 minutes.
>>
>> Alternately, what about checking for a marker in a top-level (not a
>> line note) comment, which signals "I finished a review, aggregate it
>> and post it to b.p.o"?
>
>
> The problem is simply forgetting to leave that marker since it isn't
> required for someone's review comments to be seen in GitHub.

In that case, what about using a marker in combination with a longer
cooldown automatic aggregator?  If you remember the marker, it posts
immediately and is more likely to do what you want; if you forget the
marker, it happens eventually anyway.

Or just forget the marker entirely, and treat any top-level comment on
the PR as "there's something that should be posted to b.p.o now".
That method fits better with what we're used to with Rietveld.

-- 
Zach