-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.4k
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
chore: autolabel more for A-*
#11679
Conversation
r? @ehuss (rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
cc @Muscraft |
I feel like this change does a couple of things
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good!
Do you think we should include the label descriptions above the table? It has helped me classify what should go where a few times. I am not sure it is needed in this PR just something to think about.
Or maybe we could teach triagebot how to manage labels based on |
Thanks! @bors r+ |
chore: autolabel more for `A-*` ### What does this PR try to resolve? A follow-up of #11664 for most `A-*` labels. We have a [doc here][hackmd] tracking autolabel stuff. ### How should we test and review this PR? All `trigger_files` fields are based on human knowledge, some labels are hard to determine. The rule to apply a label on a file: *What a file does ⊂ What a label describes*. This is a bit conservative. Shall we be more aggressive? So that it will hurt us and make us know how to improve. [hackmd]: https://hackmd.io/cNsQWpKyRSWHlgVAIYUFdg Some files are not included in any of label. Most of them are utilities or types definitions. I think that makes sense not including them at this moment.
💔 Test failed - checks-actions |
CI will be blocked until rust-lang/rust#107688 lands in nightly. |
@bors retry |
chore: autolabel more for `A-*` ### What does this PR try to resolve? A follow-up of #11664 for most `A-*` labels. We have a [doc here][hackmd] tracking autolabel stuff. ### How should we test and review this PR? All `trigger_files` fields are based on human knowledge, some labels are hard to determine. The rule to apply a label on a file: *What a file does ⊂ What a label describes*. This is a bit conservative. Shall we be more aggressive? So that it will hurt us and make us know how to improve. [hackmd]: https://hackmd.io/cNsQWpKyRSWHlgVAIYUFdg Some files are not included in any of label. Most of them are utilities or types definitions. I think that makes sense not including them at this moment.
💔 Test failed - checks-actions |
I was wrong. Not yet landed 😅 |
@bors r+ |
💡 This pull request was already approved, no need to approve it again.
|
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
10 commits in 82c3bb79e3a19a5164e33819ef81bfc2c984bc56..39c13e67a5962466cc7253d41bc1099bbcb224c3 2023-02-04 22:52:16 +0000 to 2023-02-12 02:01:08 +0000 - chore: Update to toml v0.6, toml_edit v0.18 (rust-lang/cargo#11618) - doc: more doc comments and intra-doc links (rust-lang/cargo#11703) - Deny warnings in CI, not locally (rust-lang/cargo#11699) - add comment to lto.rs (rust-lang/cargo#11701) - Re-export cargo_new::NewProjectKind as public (rust-lang/cargo#11700) - Add '-C' flag for changing current dir before build (rust-lang/cargo#10952) - `-Zrustdoc-scrape-example` must fail with bad build script (rust-lang/cargo#11694) - Update CHANGELOG for 1.68 backports (rust-lang/cargo#11690) - Update 1password to the version 2 CLI (rust-lang/cargo#11692) - chore: autolabel more for `A-*` (rust-lang/cargo#11679)
Update cargo 10 commits in 82c3bb79e3a19a5164e33819ef81bfc2c984bc56..39c13e67a5962466cc7253d41bc1099bbcb224c3 2023-02-04 22:52:16 +0000 to 2023-02-12 02:01:08 +0000 - chore: Update to toml v0.6, toml_edit v0.18 (rust-lang/cargo#11618) - doc: more doc comments and intra-doc links (rust-lang/cargo#11703) - Deny warnings in CI, not locally (rust-lang/cargo#11699) - add comment to lto.rs (rust-lang/cargo#11701) - Re-export cargo_new::NewProjectKind as public (rust-lang/cargo#11700) - Add '-C' flag for changing current dir before build (rust-lang/cargo#10952) - `-Zrustdoc-scrape-example` must fail with bad build script (rust-lang/cargo#11694) - Update CHANGELOG for 1.68 backports (rust-lang/cargo#11690) - Update 1password to the version 2 CLI (rust-lang/cargo#11692) - chore: autolabel more for `A-*` (rust-lang/cargo#11679) r? `@ghost`
Update cargo 10 commits in 82c3bb79e3a19a5164e33819ef81bfc2c984bc56..39c13e67a5962466cc7253d41bc1099bbcb224c3 2023-02-04 22:52:16 +0000 to 2023-02-12 02:01:08 +0000 - chore: Update to toml v0.6, toml_edit v0.18 (rust-lang/cargo#11618) - doc: more doc comments and intra-doc links (rust-lang/cargo#11703) - Deny warnings in CI, not locally (rust-lang/cargo#11699) - add comment to lto.rs (rust-lang/cargo#11701) - Re-export cargo_new::NewProjectKind as public (rust-lang/cargo#11700) - Add '-C' flag for changing current dir before build (rust-lang/cargo#10952) - `-Zrustdoc-scrape-example` must fail with bad build script (rust-lang/cargo#11694) - Update CHANGELOG for 1.68 backports (rust-lang/cargo#11690) - Update 1password to the version 2 CLI (rust-lang/cargo#11692) - chore: autolabel more for `A-*` (rust-lang/cargo#11679) r? `@ghost`
Update cargo 10 commits in 82c3bb79e3a19a5164e33819ef81bfc2c984bc56..39c13e67a5962466cc7253d41bc1099bbcb224c3 2023-02-04 22:52:16 +0000 to 2023-02-12 02:01:08 +0000 - chore: Update to toml v0.6, toml_edit v0.18 (rust-lang/cargo#11618) - doc: more doc comments and intra-doc links (rust-lang/cargo#11703) - Deny warnings in CI, not locally (rust-lang/cargo#11699) - add comment to lto.rs (rust-lang/cargo#11701) - Re-export cargo_new::NewProjectKind as public (rust-lang/cargo#11700) - Add '-C' flag for changing current dir before build (rust-lang/cargo#10952) - `-Zrustdoc-scrape-example` must fail with bad build script (rust-lang/cargo#11694) - Update CHANGELOG for 1.68 backports (rust-lang/cargo#11690) - Update 1password to the version 2 CLI (rust-lang/cargo#11692) - chore: autolabel more for `A-*` (rust-lang/cargo#11679) r? `@ghost`
What does this PR try to resolve?
A follow-up of #11664 for most
A-*
labels. We have a doc here tracking autolabel stuff.How should we test and review this PR?
All
trigger_files
fields are based on human knowledge, some labels are hard to determine.The rule to apply a label on a file: What a file does ⊂ What a label describes.
This is a bit conservative. Shall we be more aggressive? So that it will hurt us and make us know how to improve.
Some files are not included in any of label. Most of them are utilities or types definitions. I think that makes sense not including them at this moment.