add some best practices to streamline PR approval process

[sbmetz]

[Background] Since we require 3 approvals to merge an SSG change, any changes that happen after one or two approvals invalidate those approvals, effectively resetting the "clock" to 0. This can mean that early approvers may be asked to "re-approve" as additional changes are made. In general, this is appropriate -- even small late-breaking changes can be meaningful to the whole pull request. General consensus at the March 2024 style guide meeting was to not change the approval process, but we agreed that the re-approval churn can be distracting.

I am opening this issue to propose some guidelines/best practices to the admin responsibilities page.

Here are some suggestions -- please expand, add other ideas, upvote/downvote an idea (that is, chime in on what you like or don't like), suggest alternate wording, etc. The idea isn't to be overly prescriptive (there are many paths to effective collaboration), but to offer suggestions that might streamline the approval process.

• Review the issues and existing discussion, especially around complex pull requests (several files or several edits). If the status of the PR is unclear, ask for clarity before asking for approvals. This step still drives the PR toward completion.

• If there are multiple complex pull requests pending, consider staggering the requests for approvals. When several outstanding PRs are candidates for approval, and reviews require changes and re-approvals, it can be hard for project members to keep up with the slack channel traffic.

• On the other hand, grouping simple pull requests into a batch approval request might help approvers maximize their repository visit.

[bredamc]

Great ideas! Thanks, @sbmetz :+1:

[bredamc]

Another suggestion: Create a separate Slack channel for PR approval requests, to target only those who can actually approve. Perhaps add issue discussions in that channel too.

[bergerhoffer]

Posted in slack, but I'd prefer not to create a separate slack channel for approvals. Other folks in the channel might actually be interested in seeing what's coming (and might want to weigh in on the discussion). We have the @ ccs-style-council slack alias for reaching just those on council who can do approvals, if needed.

Plus also that I have too many slack channels already :sweat_smile:. And I don't think there is too much activity in that channel that another channel is necessary. There are usually only a handful of threads each day, if any.

[snarayan-redhat]

@bergerhoffer do we have a link to the slack thread? It might be easier to keep a track of where the issue stands.

[sbmetz]

Here's the related slack thread: https://redhat-internal.slack.com/archives/C04HKR61MN1/p1712829051295799