Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

validate single email per github handle in sigs.yaml #8178

Open
BenTheElder opened this issue Nov 21, 2024 · 7 comments
Open

validate single email per github handle in sigs.yaml #8178

BenTheElder opened this issue Nov 21, 2024 · 7 comments
Labels
committee/steering Denotes an issue or PR intended to be handled by the steering committee. sig/contributor-experience Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Contributor Experience.

Comments

@BenTheElder
Copy link
Member

We should be able to validate that we don't wind up with multiple different emails somehow for contributors with entries for multiple SIGs/WGs

follow-up to #8138

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. label Nov 21, 2024
@BenTheElder
Copy link
Member Author

uhhhh
/committee steering
/sig contributor-experience

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added committee/steering Denotes an issue or PR intended to be handled by the steering committee. sig/contributor-experience Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Contributor Experience. and removed needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. labels Nov 21, 2024
@BenTheElder
Copy link
Member Author

BenTheElder commented Nov 22, 2024

... this is a bit messy to add. We have a validation phase but the output is buried and the make verify scripting is wired only to show a generated diff rather than validation errors.

Really it would be better if we didn't have to duplicate people definitions and refactored them out to be defined once and referred to by github handle within each of the references in groups, but that's a breaking change and I'm hesitant about what may break.

You could imagine using the github handle as a unique key (since github already enforces that) to refer to a single shared map of people by name / employer / email / ...

@palnabarun
Copy link
Member

make test can easily add another small script which could validate this restriction. And then the Make target can be added as a presubmit.

On the restriction itself, I am very okay with it. It's a must needed thing.

@BenTheElder
Copy link
Member Author

make test can easily add another small script which could validate this restriction. And then the Make target can be added as a presubmit.

That's a good idea.

I think we should also consider refactoring out the config to avoid duplicating people definitions by design, but I don't know if we have any requirements on the stability of the format.

That would eliminate the need for the test, the need for manual fixups, and the need to manually enter repeated information altogether ...

@jberkus
Copy link
Contributor

jberkus commented Nov 25, 2024

... why do I feel like we're constantly re-inventing relational databases?

@palnabarun
Copy link
Member

I think we should also consider refactoring out the config to avoid duplicating people definitions by design, but I don't know if we have any requirements on the stability of the format.

Let's take it as a separate concern. We might be over-engineering a flat structure to a relational DB. There are not many people with multiple roles around the community. The number most likely is a handful.

@palnabarun
Copy link
Member

... why do I feel like we're constantly re-inventing relational databases?

Haven't YAMLs become databases? 😆 just kidding.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
committee/steering Denotes an issue or PR intended to be handled by the steering committee. sig/contributor-experience Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Contributor Experience.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants