Emilio Jesús Gallego Arias (Jan 25 2023 at 18:59): Emilio Jesús Gallego Arias (Jan 25 2023 at 18:59):Hi folks, what do you think about changing the kind: infrastructure tag to part: infra ?
Actually that'd work better in terms of part: infrastructure being almost covered by part: CI, part: build, etc...
Ali Caglayan (Jan 25 2023 at 19:00):What is the reason?
Ali Caglayan (Jan 25 2023 at 19:01):"kind: " today has a special status for coq/bot for instance.
Théo Zimmermann (Jan 25 2023 at 19:36):kind: is a mandatory label category to merge a PR. If we remove it (e.g., in favor of part: CI, part: build, etc.), this means that we have to always add another kind: label, such as kind: feature, kind: enhancement, kind: fix. And it's often the case that we don't want to qualify infrastructure work as such IINM...
Emilio Jesús Gallego Arias (Jan 25 2023 at 19:55):Good point @Théo Zimmermann , what would be an example of such a change?
For me part: X vs kind: A is about "action A on object X"
Emilio Jesús Gallego Arias (Jan 25 2023 at 19:56):we have kind: internal and kind: cleanup tho
Théo Zimmermann (Jan 25 2023 at 19:57):Indeed. I agree in principle with your interpretation and that we are not always consistent.
Théo Zimmermann (Jan 25 2023 at 19:57):I wouldn't object to revisiting the labels, even if it requires adapting coqbot BTW.
Emilio Jesús Gallego Arias (Jan 25 2023 at 20:05):Does coqbot care about kind: infra ? As far as I know is the only label that seems wrong
Emilio Jesús Gallego Arias (Jan 25 2023 at 20:05):At least that's the one I feel most out of sync, the rest of kind seem logical to me
Théo Zimmermann (Jan 25 2023 at 20:54):Yes, kind: infrastructure specifically is also special as it deactivates minimization.
Last updated: Apr 18 2024 at 19:02 UTC