Improving Merge Request review processes

[Simon Peyton Jones]

Terrific.

We just need to add some guidance for contributors about when and how to
use the new tag.

Where should that guidance live?  We have the Contributing to GHC wiki page
<https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/wikis/contributing>.  It in turn (not
very prominently) points to Contributing a patch
<https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/wikis/Contributing-a-Patch>.  Are
these our primary pages?  If so, perhaps the latter is the one to edit?

Simon



On Fri, 23 Jun 2023 at 11:14, Matthew Pickering <matthewtpickering at gmail.com>
wrote:

> We discussed this in the meeting on Tuesday.
>
> The conclusion was that
>
> * We now have a new label "Blocked on Review", which people can add to
> merge requests if they are blocked waiting for a review.
> * The "Reviewer Group" is taken to be the same as the "GHC Team" (see
> https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc-hq/-/tree/main), hence people
> trusted to be part of the GHC team are expected to perform review as
> well.
> * We will take up some of the time on the Tuesday meeting by talking
> about merge requests which are blocked and assigning them to people
> for review.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Matt
>
> On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 at 10:03 PM Matthew Pickering
> <matthewtpickering at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Recently there has been some discussion about better systems and
> > processes for keeping the flow of merge requests going smoothly
> > through the review process. It has become clear that we need to be a
> > bit more deliberate in handling merge requests in order to make sure
> > we can correctly triage, review and merge the many fantastic
> > contributions we get to GHC on a daily basis.
> >
> > Therefore we are proposing to introduce a "GHC Reviewer Group" whose
> > members will share collective responsibility for ensuring that MRs
> > make their way smoothly from creation to merge.
> >
> > The description of the role and responsibility for this group can be
> > read and commented on here:
> >
> >
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FK9mryjC82DM6e5yxP7BOgu94As2bXccb55L8OrjPf4/edit?usp=sharing
> >
> > The motivation for this proposal is two-fold.
> >
> > * Ensuring that MRs are reviewed and triaged in a timely manner.
> > * Documenting where the responsibility for MR reviewing
> >
> > We welcome any discussion about this document and other ideas about
> > how to improve the systems in this regard.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Matt
> _______________________________________________
> ghc-devs mailing list
> ghc-devs at haskell.org
> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-devs/attachments/20230623/24cfac72/attachment.html>