Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

PR not put back to 'needs_reviewer' #99

Open
raboof opened this issue Nov 9, 2020 · 4 comments
Open

PR not put back to 'needs_reviewer' #99

raboof opened this issue Nov 9, 2020 · 4 comments

Comments

@raboof
Copy link

raboof commented Nov 9, 2020

In NixOS/nixpkgs#98938 (comment) , the reviewer is inactive, and marvin (correctly) adds a comment that the PR will be set back from awaiting_reviewer to needs_reviewer, but it doesn't actually do so.

@timokau
Copy link
Owner

timokau commented Nov 9, 2020

It is supposed to set a timeout_pending label when posting the warning. For some reason I forgot to add the label (but the code for actually timing out PRs with the label exists). Odd, I'm pretty sure I tested that behavior.

Thanks for the notification!

@berbiche
Copy link

berbiche commented Nov 9, 2020

marvin should probably only consider reviewers with merge access

@timokau
Copy link
Owner

timokau commented Nov 9, 2020

No, making reviews from reviewers without merge access more useful is arguably the main purpose of the bot. See the README of this repo for more info.

@timokau
Copy link
Owner

timokau commented Nov 9, 2020

The nagging message probably could use an overhaul with some more concrete actionable tips for the reviewer, since they might not be familiar with marvin. The usage is already explained in marvin's initial comment, but having the concrete next steps summarized in the nag message would probably help.

timokau added a commit that referenced this issue Dec 28, 2020
This way it will be clear what the PR author can do if marvin starts to
spam a PR. This will serve as a band-aid until the issue is fixed
properly.

Related: #99
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants