Re: Porting wptserve handlers to Python 3: next steps / code review

I think it suffices in this case to just have a known list of users, and
Ziran can round-robin between them as she sends out pull requests.
Automation seems overkill here :)

On Tue, 19 May 2020 at 15:53, Philip Jägenstedt <foolip@chromium.org> wrote:

> Attempting to answer the question for Stephen since I've poked a bit at
> wpt-pr-bot in the past.
>
> In
> https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt-pr-bot/blob/master/lib/comment.js we
> have access to the inferred labels (as metadata.labels) and could use them,
> but the issue is that the python3 label is now added by hand. One could try
> to add support for acting on labels that are added at PR creation time, or
> reaction to added labels, but it the resulting behavior would not be easy
> to understand, I predict.
>
> I guess there's no way to infer from a PRs content alone if it's a python3
> conversion?
>
> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 7:41 PM Robert Ma <robertma@chromium.org> wrote:
>
>> Thank you, Josh & Philip!
>>
>> I've updated the RFC <https://github.com/web-platform-tests/rfcs/pull/49> to
>> reflect our latest consensus (preferring bytes everywhere). Please take
>> another look (the diff
>> <https://github.com/web-platform-tests/rfcs/pull/49/commits/2e95208da921d31cfbd38a37204777bd62ef1fd1>
>> isn't big because I basically swapped two sections with some additions).
>>
>> Stephen, would it be possible to tweak wpt-pr-bot to handle PRs with the
>> "python3" label and assign them to a special pool of reviewers?
>>
>> On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 8:17 AM Philip Jägenstedt <foolip@chromium.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I can confirm I volunteer to review!
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 8:54 PM Josh Matthews <josh@joshmatthews.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I've got some experience porting the eventsource handlers (although I
>>>> haven't submitted that PR yet due to a couple unfinished tricky handlers),
>>>> so I can review PRs as well.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Josh
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 12 May 2020 at 13:03, Stephen Mcgruer <smcgruer@chromium.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for sending this email Robert; I'm excited to see us keep the
>>>>> ball rolling on Python 3 support.
>>>>>
>>>>> > In addition, we'd really appreciate a few more people to sign up for
>>>>> reviewing these changes to share the workload. Anyone volunteering?
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm happy to review PRs, albeit with no specific prior knowledge.
>>>>> +foolip, who volunteered to review as well.
>>>>>
>>>>> That'd bring us to 5 reviewers assuming jgraham and annevk are willing
>>>>> to review; do you think that is enough Robert?
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 11 May 2020 at 18:19, Robert Ma <robertma@chromium.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello everyone,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We're getting close to finalizing the plan for migrating close to 500
>>>>>> wptserve handlers we have in WPT. Now we have a few concrete steps to take:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. Regarding the trial PR
>>>>>> <https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/pull/23363>, James, Anne
>>>>>> and others who'd like to take a look, do you have any other comments on
>>>>>> this PR, especially high-level ones about the general approach? This would
>>>>>> unblock the following steps and we can address small issues in parallel.
>>>>>> 2. If we agree this approach is what we wanted by having consistent
>>>>>> and explicit semantics across Python 2 and 3, I'll update the RFC
>>>>>> <https://github.com/web-platform-tests/rfcs/pull/49> (essentially
>>>>>> swapping the currently "recommended" and "alternative" approaches and
>>>>>> filling in some more concrete guidelines), and kick off a new round of RFC
>>>>>> process (hopefully relatively quick since many people are already on board
>>>>>> with the new approach).
>>>>>> 3. Meanwhile, Ziran can start porting more handlers (we can wait
>>>>>> until the RFC is accepted to actually merge the PRs). We have hundreds of
>>>>>> handlers and we should expect lots of PRs. Reviewing them is a critical
>>>>>> task, too. Since we now have concrete guidelines and changes will be
>>>>>> largely mechanical, I'm proposing to adopt the "LGTM % nits" convention
>>>>>> widely used in Chromium: if a PR largely looks good but has some minor
>>>>>> issues, approve the PR with comments. In addition, we'd really appreciate a
>>>>>> few more people to sign up for reviewing these changes to share the
>>>>>> workload. Anyone volunteering?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>> Robert
>>>>>>
>>>>>