Nxp file groups #99104
Nxp file groups #99104
Conversation
This new section allows defining a group of files in an area and makes it possible to assign collaborators to the file group being defined. The purpose of this new section is to allow fine tuning who is added as reviewer when files change in a group. It is especially useful in large areas with hundreds of files, for example platform areas. Signed-off-by: Anas Nashif <[email protected]>
Deal with new section in the maintainer file defining file groups. Signed-off-by: Anas Nashif <[email protected]>
Document file groups and how they should be used. Signed-off-by: Anas Nashif <[email protected]>
Merge two workflows into one for code sharing an efficiency. Signed-off-by: Anas Nashif <[email protected]>
Scripts only used by CI, so move it into that directory. Signed-off-by: Anas Nashif <[email protected]>
Also request reviewes from maintainers of changes areas in the maintainer file. Signed-off-by: Anas Nashif <[email protected]>
File groups inherit file patterns from their parent area. A file will only match a file group if it first matches the parent area's patterns, and then also matches the file group's own patterns. This allows file groups to further filter and subdivide files that are already covered by the area. Signed-off-by: Anas Nashif <[email protected]>
Use the new file-groups feature to consolidate the NXP areas, and have more specific collaborators/reviewers over certain areas. Signed-off-by: Declan Snyder <[email protected]>
|
| - mmahadevan108 | ||
| - MarkWangChinese | ||
| files: | ||
| - drivers/usb/ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
so does the previous filters above get the initial priority to force it into the NXP drivers area then this sub-filter will select these collaborators?
| collaborators: | ||
| - iuliana-prodan | ||
| - TomasBarakNXP | ||
| - VitekST |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think Xtensa should stay as a top level similar to the NXP MPU bucket to ensure the proper assignee and collaborators.
| NXP Platforms (Xtensa): | ||
| status: maintained | ||
| maintainers: | ||
| - dbaluta |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it is better to have this bucket stay the way it is. This will ensure that dbaluta is the assignee for any xtensa based PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What I have seen happening already with current way is that all the xtensa files overlap completely with other areas (MPU or MCU, usually one at a time), the PRs usually touch non-xtensa files and I have not seen @dbaluta as assignee on Xtensa PRs due to this, the MCU or MPU maintainer gets 100% match but xtensa gets less than 100% match, so @dbaluta not assigned anyways, but maybe he can correct me.
3 participants
this is an initial pass of using file groups to help consolidate NXP areas and add more specific reviewers and also limiting "total reviewers" added per PR to NXP files if they are not relevant. more file groups will probably be added in the future especially in the drivers area.
based on #98884