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

add us to OWNERS for SHA #2047

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Sep 19, 2019
Merged

add us to OWNERS for SHA #2047

merged 4 commits into from
Sep 19, 2019

Conversation

rmgogogo
Copy link
Contributor

@rmgogogo rmgogogo commented Sep 5, 2019

Add us to OWNERS for SHA


This change is Reviewable

@Bobgy
Copy link
Contributor

Bobgy commented Sep 6, 2019

/retest

@Bobgy Bobgy removed their assignment Sep 6, 2019
@Bobgy
Copy link
Contributor

Bobgy commented Sep 6, 2019

/assign @IronPan

@jingzhang36
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@IronPan
Copy link
Member

IronPan commented Sep 6, 2019

/hold

@IronPan
Copy link
Member

IronPan commented Sep 6, 2019

Could you add to just frontend for now?

@neuromage
Copy link
Contributor

@rmgogogo Can this just be frontend for now?

@rmgogogo
Copy link
Contributor Author

I removed Yuan and I but put Jing to owner list as prefer at least one people from SHA to co operate it.

@neuromage
Copy link
Contributor

@rmgogogo You may not really need root OWNER here. Is there something outside frontend that you'll be working on, that you think will be impacted by the possible one day latency? If so, should we consider moving that to a separate directory? I think files like cloudbuild config are good candidates for this. WDYT? I definitely don't want to slow SHA team down, but I'm not sure if this will make a material difference. It is also worth noting that you have write permission to this repository, so if an emergency fix is needed, you can use this mechanism (as a last resort of course, but it will work).

@rmgogogo
Copy link
Contributor Author

Updated

@Bobgy
Copy link
Contributor

Bobgy commented Sep 18, 2019

@IronPan can you approve this one?

@IronPan
Copy link
Member

IronPan commented Sep 19, 2019

/lgtm
/approve

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: IronPan

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@Bobgy
Copy link
Contributor

Bobgy commented Sep 19, 2019

/hold cancel

@rmgogogo
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest

@Bobgy
Copy link
Contributor

Bobgy commented Sep 19, 2019

/test kubeflow-pipeline-sample-test

2 similar comments
@Bobgy
Copy link
Contributor

Bobgy commented Sep 19, 2019

/test kubeflow-pipeline-sample-test

@numerology
Copy link

/test kubeflow-pipeline-sample-test

@numerology
Copy link

/retest

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 29bbe11 into kubeflow:master Sep 19, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants