AW: Flaw in our process for dealing with trivial changes
Dr. Matthias St. Pierre
Matthias.St.Pierre at ncp-e.com
Fri Dec 13 07:58:27 UTC 2019
> On Thu, 12 Dec 2019 22:31:10 +0100,
> Dr Paul Dale wrote:
> > A red blocker along the lines of: "Triviality Unconfirmed". One of
> > the reviewers needs to remove this before the PR can be merged.
> > It's in our face, it prevent accidental merges and its low overhead.
> I still think simply adding the label should be sufficient. I dunno
> about you, but I look at labels all the time, for all sorts of
> reasons, and one saying [cla: trivial] would certainly attract my
> Let's make it bright red-orange, that'll catch anyone's eye (even mine)
> Also, removing that label will rapidly be annoying as soon as someone
> closes and re-opens a PR... or whatever other action that triggers
> the "pull_request" event (and there's a lot that does that... our
> script is being kept busy!).
This seems to be implied already by my last proposal, with just one color changed: ;-)
> Add three mutually exclusive [cla: *] labels:
> [cla: ok] (green)
> [cla: trivial] (orange)
> [cla: missing] (red)
> The CLA bot *always* sets the [cla: ok] label if it finds a CLA on file. Otherwise, it sets the
> [cla: missing] label, unless the [cla: trivial] label is already set.
> The [cla: trivial] label can only be set manually by a committer, and only after the consent
> between contributor and both reviewers has been reached.
More information about the openssl-project