[DRAFT] Add a CODEOWNERS file designating oversight of certain Evolution repo content to relevant teams #2938
Conversation
… directories to relevant teams
stmontgomery
requested review from
rjmccall,
shahmishal,
FranzBusch and
hborla
stmontgomery
added
evolution process
stmontgomery
changed the title
| # The top-level "proposals" directory. | ||
| # | ||
| # This does not have a designated owner, so its list is empty. | ||
| /proposals/ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| /proposals/ | |
| /proposals/ @swiftlang/ecosystem-steering-group @swiftlang/language-steering-group @swiftlang/platform-steering-group @swiftlang/core-team |
Let's start with top level reviewer to be the steering groups and core team.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks. My only concern is that the top-level /proposals directory is fairly high-traffic today, and specifying multiple teams as its code owners might be noisy for the members of those teams since (presumably) they will become default reviewers for each new PR in that space. So I guess it's up to those teams to decide whether they want that.
Co-authored-by: Mishal Shah <[email protected]>
| ### Evolution process documentation | ||
|
|
||
| # The primary Swift Evolution process documentation file. | ||
| /process.md @rjmccall |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I feel a little uncomfortable claiming code ownership of this, even if I am in fact likely to be involved with any changes to it.
| # The top-level "visions" directory. | ||
| # | ||
| # Approval from the Core Team is required to add a new vision document. | ||
| /visions/ @swiftlang/core-team |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is not actually true; visions are products of the evolution workgroups just like proposals are. It's just not as high-traffic as proposals/ is.
| # The top-level "proposal-templates" directory. | ||
| # | ||
| # Approval from the Core Team is required to add a new proposal template. | ||
| /proposal-templates/ @swiftlang/core-team |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Again, this is something that individual evolution workgroups are empowered to do.
I like that idea a lot, actually! One of my concerns (voiced in this comment too) is having this change begin spamming whole workgroups, when the intention is just to ensure some modest amount of visibility and having at least one representative from each workgroup could achieve that. |
This PR adds a GitHub
CODEOWNERSfile to this repo, assigning ownership and oversight responsibilities for certain content to relevant teams. But (importantly) it leaves the top-level/proposalsdirectory without a specific owner.Motivation: This originally came up because some of us on the Testing Workgroup would like to have greater awareness of PRs which modify proposals and other files related to Swift Testing. When I discovered that there was no
CODEOWNERSfile I drafted the file posted here, which assigns ownership of a few other important files and directories in the repo to people or teams I believe are responsible for them as well. The exact owners listed are of course up for discussion!My understanding of
CODEOWNERSfiles in GitHub (per documentation) is that this file alone will not prevent anyone from landing a PR, even if none of the code owners listed have approved it. To begin enforcing such a rule, this repo would need to enable branch protection, and I'm unsure whether that is enabled currently. So this PR, on its own, is not intended to restrict any PRs, although that is a policy we could consider separately.