Add CODEOWNERS file

[ace-n]

cc @djmailhot @noerog @ricalo

Reviewers and CC'd folks: please LGTM if your ownership allocation looks good. Thanks!

[gguuss]

LGTM

[ricalo]

LGTM

[fhinkel]

Hi, thanks for adding this. I'm hesitant to LGTM as long as we don't have a process for keeping this list up to date and having a definition what responsibilities ownership entails. Do other repos use owner files?

[nnegrey]

@fhinkel and @ace-n, I'm not an admin, so not sure how the repo rules are set up.

But one way that I have used CODEOWNERS in another repo is as a notification system. So if someone modifies something in an area I usually write most samples for, I get added as a reviewer to the PR, but we don't require CODEOWNERS to review. Also sorta helps us keep track of who it might be relevant to ping about filed issues and future PRs. This is one way of doing it, but it doesn't necessarily mean more work and we aren't stuck waiting for a CODEOWNER to review or come back from OOO. Not sure if that is what you had in mind though Ace.

[ace-n]

Thanks @nnegrey - yeah, that's pretty close. My main impetus here is to document *who is the PoC - and maintainer - for what*. (Motivating example - not everything in the `functions/` directory should be maintained by Functions DPEs. 🙂 ) @fhinkel - why do you believe this would become outdated, especially if we used it as an *authoritative* record of ownership? Alternatively, do you know of other easily-set-up, automatic enforcement solutions for this? (e.g. bots, plugins, etc.)

…

On Mon, Jul 15, 2019, 9:02 AM Noah Negrey ***@***.***> wrote: @fhinkel <https://github.com/fhinkel> and @ace-n <https://github.com/ace-n>, I'm not an admin, so not sure how the repo rules are set up. But one way that I have used CODEOWNERS in another repo is as a notification system. So if someone modifies something in an area I usually write most samples for, I get added as a reviewer to the PR, but we don't require CODEOWNERS to review. Also sorta helps us keep track of who it might be relevant to ping about filed issues and future PRs. This is one way of doing it, but it doesn't necessarily mean more work and we aren't stuck waiting for a CODEOWNER to review or come back from OOO. Not sure if that is what you had in mind though Ace. — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#1405?email_source=notifications&email_token=AARTZRP3UZZO6B4ADUULWB3P7SNQDA5CNFSM4H7SGG72YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGODZ6FAHA#issuecomment-511463452>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AARTZRIMCJH4MKVZWMFLMODP7SNQDANCNFSM4H7SGG7Q> .

[fhinkel]

It gets outdated when somebody shifts priorities. I'm worried that Alice is code owner for foo/. Nobody else pays attention to foo/ but Alice has long shifted focus or switched teams. So foo/ just dies a little bit.

I don't know any plugins. The only thing that works is IMO is a person/dedicated team responsible for the whole repo who assigns issues and follows up with the appropriate people.

If we use the file as a guide, that's fine for me - though most is visible in the git history.

[ace-n]

Of course, I'm not saying the file needs to be perfect - and we can always update it as needed. @afhinkel in your example - if we can't find *Alice* or they are no longer working on `foo`, we can have `foo`-related stuff default to the repo owner and update `CODEOWNERS` by *removing* Alice's assignment to `foo`. (For `nodejs-docs-samples`, you'd be the default repo-wide owner.)

…

On Tue, Jul 16, 2019, 6:51 AM F. Hinkelmann ***@***.***> wrote: It gets outdated when somebody shifts priorities. I'm worried that Alice is code owner for foo/. Nobody else pays attention to foo/ but Alice has long shifted focus or switched teams. So foo/ just dies a little bit. I don't know any plugins. The only thing that works is IMO is a person/dedicated team responsible for the whole repo who assigns issues and follows up with the appropriate people. If we use the file as a guide, that's fine for me - though most is visible in the git history. — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#1405?email_source=notifications&email_token=AARTZRIBJ4POQSZVZ2TUMI3P7XG4FA5CNFSM4H7SGG72YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOD2A5FVI#issuecomment-511824597>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AARTZRI7OQSA3KC7646SNMLP7XG4FANCNFSM4H7SGG7Q> .

[grayside]

I like codeowners, but instead of being tagged for all relevant changes in all repos to which my name is attached, it would be more sustainable if we could attach a team from which one person is randomly assigned.

@kurtisvg is exploring a bot to facilitate this.

[ace-n]

@grayside - happy to use teams instead of specific users, where applicable. Does that work in the interim?

…

On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 11:40 AM Adam Ross ***@***.***> wrote: I like codeowners, but instead of being tagged for all relevant changes in all repos to which my name is attached, it would be more sustainable if we could attach a team from which one person is randomly assigned. @kurtisvg <https://github.com/kurtisvg> is exploring a bot to facilitate this. — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#1405?email_source=notifications&email_token=AARTZRMB5G52JCRZMYTQ6A3P7YIYFA5CNFSM4H7SGG72YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOD2BYRRQ#issuecomment-511936710>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AARTZRJWCA5M4EHARQM6EH3P7YIYFANCNFSM4H7SGG7Q> .

-- Ace Nassri | Developer Programs Engineer, Cloud | pronoun.is/he | [email protected]

[grayside]

That addresses the problem of individuals moving about, yes. We may need to create some more granular teams in that case :)

[ace-n]

@noerog LGTMed offline.