Add first version of CODEOWNERS file
#45
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
preview available: https://docs.tds.cscs.ch/45 |
|
preview available: https://docs.tds.cscs.ch/45 |
abussy
approved these changes
Mar 14, 2025
RMeli
approved these changes
Mar 14, 2025
bcumming
approved these changes
Mar 14, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Adds a
CODEOWNERSfile: https://docs.github.com/en/repositories/managing-your-repositorys-settings-and-features/customizing-your-repository/about-code-owners.The main benefit (IMO) is that the "code owners" for a particular file/path will automatically get requested for reviews whenever those files are changed. This means that the relevant people will automatically be at least informed about the changes.
Note that this doesn't prevent others from giving/being requested to do reviews. This just sets the default.
At the same time I think this is a good way to encode in the git repo itself who is "responsible" for the documentation for whatever definition of "responsible" we want to agree on.
I've started with the most minimal set of code owners that I could think of. I'm happy to be a default reviewer for any changes. I'm sort of assuming that @bcumming will be ok with this as well. However, I think for the top level
*code owners it'd be good to have a few more people.@RMeli and @abussy agreed to be code owners for the CP2K page.
I'm happy to take the "Communication Libraries" section that I added in #40.
I would like to avoid making this PR "let's exactly figure out who's responsible for what" and just have the basic version in first. We can then expand the list as we update pages and find who it makes sense to make code owner for various parts. If there are other obvious candidates at this point, please do point them out right away though and I'll add them.