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

x/build/cmd/gopherbot: instances of no reviewers being assigned to CLs #38906

Open
stamblerre opened this issue May 6, 2020 · 7 comments
Open
Labels
Builders x/build issues (builders, bots, dashboards) NeedsInvestigation Someone must examine and confirm this is a valid issue and not a duplicate of an existing one.
Milestone

Comments

@stamblerre
Copy link
Contributor

There are owners for this directory, so I'm surprised no one got auto-assigned until @hyangah added reviewers. Are there logs that I can take a look at? Happy to investigate myself, but I don't know how (or if I can) access gopherbot logs.

@aca

This comment has been minimized.

@agnivade
Copy link
Contributor

agnivade commented May 7, 2020

@andybons @dmitshur

@dmitshur dmitshur changed the title cmd/gopherbot: no reviewers assigned on https://golang.org/cl/232300 x/build/cmd/gopherbot: no reviewers assigned on https://golang.org/cl/232300 May 8, 2020
@gopherbot gopherbot added this to the Unreleased milestone May 8, 2020
@gopherbot gopherbot added the Builders x/build issues (builders, bots, dashboards) label May 8, 2020
@dmitshur dmitshur added NeedsInvestigation Someone must examine and confirm this is a valid issue and not a duplicate of an existing one. and removed Builders x/build issues (builders, bots, dashboards) labels May 8, 2020
@gopherbot gopherbot added the Builders x/build issues (builders, bots, dashboards) label May 8, 2020
@stamblerre
Copy link
Contributor Author

Another instance of a CL with no reviewers auto-assigned: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/tools/+/233117.

@stamblerre stamblerre changed the title x/build/cmd/gopherbot: no reviewers assigned on https://golang.org/cl/232300 x/build/cmd/gopherbot: instances of no reviewers being assigned to CLs May 29, 2020
@stamblerre
Copy link
Contributor Author

@stamblerre stamblerre self-assigned this May 29, 2020
@stamblerre stamblerre removed their assignment Oct 22, 2020
@gopherbot
Copy link

Change https://go.dev/cl/401514 mentions this issue: cmd/gopherbot: consider Kokoro to be a bot

gopherbot pushed a commit to golang/build that referenced this issue Apr 21, 2022
We're using a distinct Gerrit account to post Kokoro CI results.
Add it to the list of known bots to stop treating it as a human
reviewer.

Also future-proof a little by considering any Gerrit account with the
SERVICE_USER tag to be a bot, since all bot accounts are expected¹ to
be a part of that group.

¹ https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/Documentation/user-attention-set.html#_important_note_for_all_host_owners_project_owners_and_bot_owners

For golang/go#38906.

Change-Id: If33def5b73fdaadec81b6fdc03a0eaf3042f8095
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/build/+/401514
Reviewed-by: Dmitri Shuralyov <dmitshur@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Hyang-Ah Hana Kim <hyangah@gmail.com>
Run-TryBot: Dmitri Shuralyov <dmitshur@golang.org>
Auto-Submit: Dmitri Shuralyov <dmitshur@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gopher Robot <gobot@golang.org>
@gopherbot
Copy link

Change https://go.dev/cl/534995 mentions this issue: cmd/gopherbot: consider Go LUCI account to be a bot, fix duplicate IDs

gopherbot pushed a commit to golang/build that referenced this issue Oct 12, 2023
The Go LUCI Gerrit account (https://go-review.googlesource.com/dashboard/60063)
now adds itself as a reviewer or CC on CLs. Even though it as expected
has a SERVICE_USER tag, we still need to add it to a hard-coded list
in humanReviewersOnChange because its first pass uses maintner only,
and tracking Gerrit accounts is not in scope of maintner's corpus.

Also remove the possibility of reviewersInMetas returning the same IDs
more than once, since that doesn't seem helpful, and use slices.Delete
to replace deleteStrings.

Tested with -dry-run -only-run='assign reviewers to CLs' flags: these
changes are enough to get it to add more reviewers to go.dev/cl/534975.

For golang/go#38906.

Change-Id: I1d44292ef56001237030b6b1aa57e65bdd10bf61
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/build/+/534995
LUCI-TryBot-Result: Go LUCI <golang-scoped@luci-project-accounts.iam.gserviceaccount.com>
Reviewed-by: Carlos Amedee <carlos@golang.org>
Auto-Submit: Dmitri Shuralyov <dmitshur@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Dmitri Shuralyov <dmitshur@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Heschi Kreinick <heschi@google.com>
@gopherbot
Copy link

Change https://go.dev/cl/543755 mentions this issue: cmd/gopherbot: consider Tricium Gerrit account to be a bot

gopherbot pushed a commit to golang/build that referenced this issue Nov 22, 2023
CL 534995 added the main Go LUCI Gerrit account, but tricium findings
are reported using https://go-review.googlesource.com/dashboard/62045.

While here, try to reduce the confusion about who "reviewers" includes
by documenting it explicitly. The term is inherently ambiguous because
Gerrit UI displays "Reviewers" and "CC" as two non-overlapping groups,
but in the Gerrit API, "reviewers" includes both groups, relying on
their state being one of "REVIEWER" or "CC" to tell them apart.

Also, reviewersInMetas doesn't deal with detecting humans, so remove
stale mentions of that from its implementation and test code.

For golang/go#38906.

Change-Id: Icde413bb22b20c3336a96195fd097d8456a2ab40
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/build/+/543755
Reviewed-by: Jorropo <jorropo.pgm@gmail.com>
Auto-Submit: Dmitri Shuralyov <dmitshur@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Heschi Kreinick <heschi@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Dmitri Shuralyov <dmitshur@google.com>
LUCI-TryBot-Result: Go LUCI <golang-scoped@luci-project-accounts.iam.gserviceaccount.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Builders x/build issues (builders, bots, dashboards) NeedsInvestigation Someone must examine and confirm this is a valid issue and not a duplicate of an existing one.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants