It would be nice to set up a CODEOWNERS file so that dedicated devs can be auto-assigned to review incoming PRs. I have zero experience with CODEOWNERS, so I'd like some input.
Alternatively, we could create a team within this organization, but it sounds like a management hassle. CODEOWNERS feels simpler to me.
(Obviously, this has nothing to do with who actually has "rights" to the code. @balefull is the owner of the original script, and since they haven't declared a license for OCD (that I know of), they probably still have full rights over this repo as well.)
@Rinn @Malibu-Stacey What are your thoughts? Would adding a CODEOWNERS file be OK? If so, are you interested in adding your username to it?
P.S. Am I correct in assuming that, if we have multiple names in CODEOWNERS, all of them are assigned to review each PR?
I assume it won't be a big problem since this repo requires only one approval to merge to master.
It would be nice to set up a CODEOWNERS file so that dedicated devs can be auto-assigned to review incoming PRs. I have zero experience with CODEOWNERS, so I'd like some input.
Alternatively, we could create a team within this organization, but it sounds like a management hassle. CODEOWNERS feels simpler to me.
(Obviously, this has nothing to do with who actually has "rights" to the code. @balefull is the owner of the original script, and since they haven't declared a license for OCD (that I know of), they probably still have full rights over this repo as well.)
@Rinn @Malibu-Stacey What are your thoughts? Would adding a CODEOWNERS file be OK? If so, are you interested in adding your username to it?
P.S. Am I correct in assuming that, if we have multiple names in CODEOWNERS, all of them are assigned to review each PR? I assume it won't be a big problem since this repo requires only one approval to merge to
master
.