-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.7k
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
[meta] Clarify prioritization alert #119959
[meta] Clarify prioritization alert #119959
Conversation
@fmease ah yes well spot 👍 Now that you mention that label, I grepped through other git repos (triagebot, rustforge and compiler-team) and there are other mentions of that legacy label. I will make a note to take care of them. |
@@ -383,7 +383,7 @@ message_on_add = """\ | |||
- Priority? | |||
- Regression? | |||
- Notify people/groups? | |||
- Needs `I-nominated`? | |||
- Needs `I-{team}-nominated`? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm curious how the {team}
placeholder is resolved (probably by the triagebot?) 🤔
I'll check that, too.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Oh right, {variable}
gets substituted by triagebot, I forgot. Well, I don't know how triagebot will deal with this, I don't think it will substitute a team since team
isn't defined anywhere I assume. {team}
was actually only meant as a placeholder for humans (“some team”) not for triagebot. If you have concrete suggestions I can change the placeholder.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think when the Triagebot is about to emit the notification to Zulip (in this point) if there is a T-*
label associated with the issue I can infer which team to use to replace {team}
.
Not 100% sure it works as I suspect, I need to check a few assumptions but worth a try. Let me get back to you on this before merging this patch 🙂
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I can submit a patch to triagebot, too, if you'd like to. It should be as simple as:
let mut teams = event
.issue
.labels
.iter()
.map(|label| &label.name)
.filter_map(|label| label.strip_prefix("T-"));
if let Some(team) = teams.next()
&& teams.next().is_none()
{
topic = topic.replace("{team}", team);
}
However, it would hard-code the concept of “teams” and rust-lang/rust's labeling system (in which T-* labels represent teams) and as far as I remember, triagebot wants to stay repository-agnostic.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@fmease left a proposal at rust-lang/triagebot#1766
How should we proceed? |
apologies @fmease I lost track of this one. I'll prioritize to check your suggestion. |
r? @apiraino |
ok rust-lang/triagebot#1766 has been merged so this is now unblocked. Let's merge this and break the notification workflow :) r=me @rustbot label -S-blocked |
@bors r=apiraino rollup |
…ert-label, r=apiraino [meta] Clarify prioritization alert Apparently, there used to exist the label <kbd>I-nominated</kbd> judging from this entry: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/8847bda592d940ae1f34d87d8cacdc09a9f787fa/triagebot.toml#L393 Since it was replaced with individual team labels, I think it makes sense to update the prioritization alert. Of course, it's not super important since the members of WG-prioritization already know that. This is just cleanup. r? apiraino or wg-prioritization
…ert-label, r=apiraino [meta] Clarify prioritization alert Apparently, there used to exist the label <kbd>I-nominated</kbd> judging from this entry: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/8847bda592d940ae1f34d87d8cacdc09a9f787fa/triagebot.toml#L393 Since it was replaced with individual team labels, I think it makes sense to update the prioritization alert. Of course, it's not super important since the members of WG-prioritization already know that. This is just cleanup. r? apiraino or wg-prioritization
…iaskrgr Rollup of 5 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#119515 (style-guide: Format single associated type `where` clauses on the same line) - rust-lang#119959 ([meta] Clarify prioritization alert) - rust-lang#123817 (Stabilize `seek_seek_relative`) - rust-lang#124532 (elaborate obligations in coherence) - rust-lang#125063 (Don't call `env::set_var` in `rustc_driver::install_ice_hook`) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
…iaskrgr Rollup of 5 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#119515 (style-guide: Format single associated type `where` clauses on the same line) - rust-lang#119959 ([meta] Clarify prioritization alert) - rust-lang#123817 (Stabilize `seek_seek_relative`) - rust-lang#125063 (Don't call `env::set_var` in `rustc_driver::install_ice_hook`) - rust-lang#125071 (Migrate rustdoc target spec json path) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Rollup merge of rust-lang#119959 - fmease:triagebot-prioritization-alert-label, r=apiraino [meta] Clarify prioritization alert Apparently, there used to exist the label <kbd>I-nominated</kbd> judging from this entry: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/8847bda592d940ae1f34d87d8cacdc09a9f787fa/triagebot.toml#L393 Since it was replaced with individual team labels, I think it makes sense to update the prioritization alert. Of course, it's not super important since the members of WG-prioritization already know that. This is just cleanup. r? apiraino or wg-prioritization
Apparently, there used to exist the label I-nominated judging from this entry:
rust/triagebot.toml
Line 393 in 8847bda
Since it was replaced with individual team labels, I think it makes sense to update the prioritization alert. Of course, it's not super important since the members of WG-prioritization already know that. This is just cleanup.
r? apiraino or wg-prioritization