search

conda-forge / conda-smithy

The tool for managing conda-forge feedstocks.
https://conda-forge.org/
BSD 3-Clause "New" or "Revised" License
152 stars 181 forks source link

Make conda smithy query the contributors (or the top X) #214

Open goanpeca opened 8 years ago

goanpeca commented 8 years ago

Just started using conda-forge recently and its awesome!

I have a suggestion regarding maintainers and pinging them. Maybe the linter could provide (only once and as a separate message beside the linting message) the list of contributors of a project based on the dev_url key (or home if dev_url is not available), at least for github initially. We could just pick the top 10 contributors (or some number) and have a message like:

Pinging @<top-contributor-1>, @<top-contributor-2>,.. @<top-contributor-n> in case they'd
like to be added as a maintainer(s) of the **<package-name>** package on conda-forge, a
library of community-built conda packages.

The maintenance burden here is light: all testing and releases are built and deployed
automatically with CI. Changes to how the package is being built can be controlled
by changing the recipe which will be located at
https://github.com/conda-forge/<package-name>-feedstock shortly after this PR
is finished and merged.

If you aren't interested in helping maintain the build, that's entirely fine too.

Might be a bit outside the scope of the linter and might be considered to intrusive by some folks? but it would make the process even more awesome than it already is :-p. I can work on this if considered a valid enhancement.

jakirkham commented 8 years ago

I do like the idea of having something like this. Maybe not the linter per se. Perhaps it could be part of a greeter bot's job ( https://github.com/conda-forge/conda-forge.github.io/issues/149 ).

Some tricky points to note. While lots of stuff is on GitHub, not everything is there. Another tricky point is how do we let the bot know where to find the repo? Sometimes that is home or in the download URL somewhere, but not always. Should it be its own kind of metadata?

goanpeca commented 8 years ago

While lots of stuff is on GitHub, not everything is there.

I think I was clear on targeting (initially) github only. Even if it is a special case, it is also the most used case.

Another tricky point is how do we let the bot know where to find the repo? Another tricky point is how do we let the bot know where to find the repo? Sometimes that is home or in the download URL somewhere, but not always. Should it be its own kind of metadata?

In most of the recipes I have seen (hosted on github) the home key of the about section uses the github repo. Since this is not necessarily the same thing for all projects, the dev_url key was introduced. Basically this key should point to the repo. So as I said:

Eventually recipes should incorporate these new keys, in this particular case, the dev_url is quite relevant.

Cheers

jakirkham commented 7 years ago

Just a question, do you think this is still a worthwhile feature?

No doubt it would have been very useful in the beginning. However, we have moved from people contributing recipes for packages they use to developers contributing recipes for their own code. In this last case, we don't really need to contact the developers as they have showed up in person (so to speak).

goanpeca commented 7 years ago

Its up to you dude. I am not aware of stats/trends on this :-)