Skip to content

Introduce CODEOWNERS for reviewer assignment of submodule updates - #2487

Merged
ScottTodd merged 1 commit into
ROCm:mainfrom
ScottTodd:codeowners-dependabot
Dec 9, 2025
Merged

ScottTodd merged 1 commit into
ROCm:mainfrom
ScottTodd:codeowners-dependabot

Conversation

@ScottTodd

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Progress on #223.

As reported at #2400 (comment), dependabot no longer supports the reviewers field and instead suggests that projects use CODEOWNERS: https://github.blog/changelog/2025-04-29-dependabot-reviewers-configuration-option-being-replaced-by-code-owners/.

Comment thread .github/CODEOWNERS
Comment on lines +1 to +3
# Regularly updated submodules
/rocm-libraries/ @ROCm/TheRockInfra
/rocm-systems/ @ROCm/TheRockInfra

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We can add other entries here later. I'm thinking of at least this one:

# Build containers that need careful review
/dockerfiles/build_*    @stellaraccident

I'm also tempted to add myself for

  • docs/
  • patches/
  • external-builds/pytorch/

I feel like I've been keeping a close enough eye on the repository with the current PR load that CODEOWNERS isn't really needed yet though.

Other areas that we could consider owners for (due to how sensitive some parts of these subtrees are architecturally):

  • .github/workflows/
  • build_tools/packaging/
  • cmake/
  • third-party/
  • third-party/sysdeps/

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I agree with CODEOWNERS being added to other areas as well. in fact having CODEOWNERs to entire build_tools/ would be good.

@ScottTodd
ScottTodd requested a review from amd-shiraz December 9, 2025 21:39

@ammallya ammallya left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good to me!

@ScottTodd
ScottTodd merged commit de4a81a into ROCm:main Dec 9, 2025
33 of 34 checks passed
@ScottTodd
ScottTodd deleted the codeowners-dependabot branch December 9, 2025 23:54
@github-project-automation github-project-automation Bot moved this from TODO to Done in TheRock Triage Dec 9, 2025
@jayhawk-commits

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

I asked @amd-aakash to include the monitoring team on approving submodule bumps if they observe the PRs passing CI during their work hours.

rponnuru5 pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 12, 2025
)

Progress on #223.

As reported at
#2400 (comment),
dependabot no longer supports the `reviewers` field and instead suggests
that projects use `CODEOWNERS`:
https://github.blog/changelog/2025-04-29-dependabot-reviewers-configuration-option-being-replaced-by-code-owners/.
ScottTodd added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 12, 2025
Follow-up to #2487. See
#2520 (comment) - this
was not assigning reviewers as expected.

I'm not sure how to test this...
subodh-dubey-amd pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 15, 2025
)

Progress on #223.

As reported at
#2400 (comment),
dependabot no longer supports the `reviewers` field and instead suggests
that projects use `CODEOWNERS`:
https://github.blog/changelog/2025-04-29-dependabot-reviewers-configuration-option-being-replaced-by-code-owners/.
subodh-dubey-amd pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 15, 2025
Follow-up to #2487. See
#2520 (comment) - this
was not assigning reviewers as expected.

I'm not sure how to test this...
benrichard-amd pushed a commit to benrichard-amd/TheRock that referenced this pull request Jan 5, 2026
benrichard-amd pushed a commit to benrichard-amd/TheRock that referenced this pull request Jan 5, 2026
Follow-up to ROCm#2487. See
ROCm#2520 (comment) - this
was not assigning reviewers as expected.

I'm not sure how to test this...
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

Status: Done

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants