Closed jeffhandley closed 1 year ago
Many benchmark regression issues come with an arch label (sometimes mistakenly so as the regression is not always arch specific), so I think it's important for area owners to have some visibility on these. Perhaps we could limit exclusion to triaged issues only?
Many benchmark regression issues come with an arch label (sometimes mistakenly so as the regression is not always arch specific), so I think it's important for area owners to have some visibility on these. Perhaps we could limit exclusion to triaged issues only?
I think we are excluding only arch-wasm
. so, this should work fine with the perf issues.
"runtime": [
"os-android", // @steveisok; @akoeplinger
"os-maccatalyst", // @steveisok
"os-ios", // @steveisok; @vargaz
"os-tizen", // @alpencolt; @gbalykov, @hjleee, @wscho77, @clamp03
"os-tvos", // @steveisok; @vargaz
"arch-wasm", // @lewing; @BrzVlad
],
Good call-out, @eiriktsarpalis. For the os-
and arch-wasm
labels, we do have folks assigned to monitor them as @tarekgh mentioned. But we'll need to make sure we only use these exclusions for labels where the alternate responsibility is clear.
Fixes #55
This introduces the concept of exclusion labels and it sets the exclusion labels per repo, with the dotnet/runtime repo's exclusion labels being those with
arch-
andos-
labels that have assigned leads/owners.This PR includes recognition of a https://github.com/dotnet/fabricbot-config/labels/test-exclusion label within this repository so that we can test this logic from this repo once merged here.
Note for @tarekgh -- I was previously confident that we had concluded not to remove cards from the project board when the issue was moved to a different area; I was wrong. We do remove the cards from the old boards in those cases. I followed suit here, and we will remove cards from area pod boards if they gain one of the
arch-
oros-
labels.