summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/danger/roulette
Commit message (Collapse)AuthorAgeFilesLines
* Document database review processToon Claes2019-07-191-11/+4
| | | | See https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/gl-infra/infrastructure/issues/6069
* Excludes MR author from Review roulette61157-reviewer-roulette-shouldn-t-include-the-author-as-a-possibilityJacopo2019-06-121-4/+4
| | | | | Excludes MR author from gitlab_ui and single_codebase Review roulette results.
* Show Test Automation Engineer for spec/feature asLin Jen-Shin2019-06-061-3/+7
| | | | reviewers.
* Extract roulette to its own moduleLin Jen-Shin2019-05-301-39/+6
| | | | So it's more modular and extensible
* Fix reviewer roulette when no-one is in a categorySean McGivern2019-04-301-1/+3
| | | | This would return `people.size` before, when it should return `nil`.
* Exclude reviewers with OOO in statusMichael Kozono2019-04-291-8/+34
|
* Pick reviewers based on branch namestable-reviewer-rouletteSean McGivern2019-04-081-4/+14
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Change reviewer roulette to always pick the same reviewers for the same branch name. We do this by: 1. Making the branch name 'canonical' across CE and EE by stripping a leading 'ce-' or 'ee-' and a trailing '-ce' or '-ee'. If people are following our branch naming guidelines, this should give the same branch name in both repos. 2. Converting the branch name to a stable integer by taking the integer form of its MD5. 3. Passing that integer as a seed to Ruby's `Random` class, which 'may be used to ensure repeatable sequences of pseudo-random numbers between different runs of the program' (from the Ruby documentation). The upshot is that the same branch name (in CE and EE) should always pick the same reviewers, and those should be evenly distributed across the set of possible reviewers due to the use of MD5.
* Add issue links to Danger roulette commentsSean McGivern2019-04-081-0/+3
|
* Make trainee maintainers three times as likely to be picked60035-weight-trainee-maintainers-higher-in-reviewer-rouletteSean McGivern2019-04-051-2/+4
| | | | | | | | | | Trainee maintainers count as reviewers, but should get more reviews than most reviewers, as they need practice to become a maintainer. This makes them three times as likely to be picked (compared to another reviewer; compared to before, it's roughly twice as likely at the current numbers for each). Also, switch to `Array#sample` because I think it looks nicer.
* Set specific reviewers for the GitLab UI WG effortgl-set-up-gitlab-ui-danger-reviewerFilipa Lacerda2019-03-291-1/+3
|
* Set specific reviewers for single codebase effortMarin Jankovski2019-03-111-1/+3
| | | | | | | This extends Danger so it informs MR authors that single codebase merge requests need to be approved by a specific group of engineers. Co-authored-by: Yorick Peterse <yorickpeterse@gmail.com>
* Reviewer roulette ignores changelogsNick Thomas2019-02-141-0/+3
|
* Reviewer roulette via Danger56087-danger-rouletteNick Thomas2019-02-131-0/+78
Make danger pick reviewers and maintainers at random, for feontend, backend, database, etc, changes, whenever files belonging to those teams get changed.
View Lorry Controller Status