Core-workflow: Nominate Joannah Nanjekye to Python Triage Team

[willingc]

Request for Python Triage membership

| | Description |
| --- | -------------------------- |
| GitHub username | @nanjekyejoannah |
| bpo username | nanjekyejoannah |
| Additional info | recommended by @willingc | |

I enthusiastically recommend Joannah. She has been a dedicated volunteer triager and contributor, and I'm grateful for the work she does.

[corona10]

Awesome!

[brettcannon]

@willingc I assume @nanjekyejoannah is good with this nomination? Otherwise you being a core dev doing the nomination is an implicit approval/endorsement which means we just need Joannah to say she wants the responsibility. 😃

[nanjekyejoannah]

Thanks, @willingc for nomination. @brettcannon and others, I consent to responsibilities.

[willingc]

@brettcannon @Mariatta Would a checkbox on the issue template be helpful to state that the person consents when proposed by a core dev?

[vstinner]

+1 for me as well

Since @nanjekyejoannah already has the bug triage permission on bugs.python.org, I'm fine with adding her to the GitHub triage team.

But As I wrote for @corona10's nomination https://github.com/python/core-workflow/issues/357#issuecomment-525153345, I would prefer to provide a mentor to @nanjekyejoannah to help her to handle her new responsibilities (ex: close a PR).

Since I'm already mentoring @nanjekyejoannah, I would be ok to mentor her for her new responsibilities.

[Mariatta]

Sorry, but I need a break from open source and about to be OOOS, so I'm unassigning myself. Can someone else look into this?

[brettcannon]

I'm looking into it.

[ewdurbin]

Invite sent.

[vstinner]

FYI I sent the following email to @nanjekyejoannah. I asked her to double check with me before using new "dangerous" operations (more dangerous than closing a bug at bugs.python.org).

---

Hi Joannah,

Congrats, you got the bug triage permission on the Python organization of GitHub!
https://github.com/python/core-workflow/issues/358

Compared to your previous bug triage role on bugs.python.org, you can now also close/re-open a pull request on GitHub (and close/re-open bugs on Python projects other than cpython, cpython still uses bugs.python.org for bugs). You can also apply labels.

During one month, I would prefer that you ask me before closing a pull request or before adding labels (especially "automerge" and "skip issue") to a pull request. Just to double check ;-)

Victor

[willingc]

Thanks @vstinner.

[nanjekyejoannah]

FYI I sent the following email to @nanjekyejoannah. I asked her to double check with me before using new "dangerous" operations (more dangerous than closing a bug at bugs.python.org).

Hi Joannah,

Congrats, you got the bug triage permission on the Python organization of GitHub!

358

Compared to your previous bug triage role on bugs.python.org, you can now also close/re-open a pull request on GitHub (and close/re-open bugs on Python projects other than cpython, cpython still uses bugs.python.org for bugs). You can also apply labels.

During one month, I would prefer that you ask me before closing a pull request or before adding labels (especially "automerge" and "skip issue") to a pull request. Just to double-check ;-)

Victor

Noted and Thank you @vstinner. FYI, the email might have been spammed :). I will double-check.

[vstinner]

Noted and Thank you @vstinner. FYI, the email might have been spammed :). I will double-check.

Oh. I sent it from my new email address: Victor Stinner [e-mail].

[aeros]

Congrats @nanjekyejoannah!

@vstinner:

During one month, I would prefer that you ask me before closing a pull request or before adding labels (especially "automerge" and "skip issue") to a pull request. Just to double-check ;-)

Triagers can't really use the automerge label, it's automatically removed by the bots if anyone other than a core dev attempts to add it (according to Mariatta). I was initially concerned about this since triagers weren't supposed to be able to directly or indirectly merge PRs.

As far as skip issue goes, I've only been using it myself for PRs that involve fairly trivial documentation changes, such as grammar/typo corrections. It might also be appropriate for manual backports.

Based on the recent feedback in https://github.com/python/devguide/pull/530, it seems that we're going to have triagers suggest that GitHub PRs/issues should be closed through the usage of the new stale label and the already existing invalid label, but have the core devs responsible for the actual closing.

[vstinner]

As far as skip issue goes, I've only been using it myself for PRs that involve fairly trivial documentation changes, such as grammar/typo corrections.

It's fine for grammar/typo corrections. For backports, the bot which creates backport PRs automatically copies labels.