Grant triagers the ability to re-run a failed CI

[meixg]

What is the problem this feature will solve?

I see CI sometimes gets flaky, and the PR author has to find a collaborator to re-run it. Maybe triagers can help with that too?

Triage now can add the request-ci label to PRs, but it will completely re-run a CI from zero.

What is the feature you are proposing to solve the problem?

Grant triagers the ability to the resume build option.

What alternatives have you considered?

Or maybe request-ci label can be processed more smartly.

[gireeshpunathil]

ref: https://github.com/orgs/nodejs/teams/issue-triage/discussions/1?from_comment=9#discussion-1-comment-9

in terms of what would happen on this request, IMO:

• a quick TSC review to ratify this request based on our access policy
• decide which way to go: access to CI for triagers versus overloading the CI bot
• find a sponsor for the feature (I am happy to be one) and an interested party to implement.

will try to discuss in next TSC sitting.

[aduh95]

Duplicate of #40817.

[gireeshpunathil]

Duplicate of #40817.

may be duplicate in terms of part of the solution, but not the underlying problem?

[aduh95]

Duplicate of #40817.

may be duplicate in terms of part of the solution, but not the underlying problem?

Yeah I guess duplicate is not the correct word, the other issue could be merged into this one as this one is more general. In any case, I think #40817 (comment) also applies here and should be addressed before we move forward with this request.

[benjamingr]

I think the current triagers program doesn't make sense to me in its current format.

Luckily I think that's because it's "too successful" in that triagers eventually makes collaborator (I certainly intend to nominate meixg if they keep up making meaningful PRs and are interested - which is not a sure thing but I'm pretty confident).

I am wondering if it wouldn't make more sense to rename the triagers team to a "collaborator internship" or "collaborator mentoring" or incubation and something similar?

That would frame giving triagers more collaborator tools like better control of how/what CI to run when.

On an unrelated note we do need to be careful since currently if triagers can add labels to pull request they can effectively land stuff with ncu. They are however unable to reverse any mistakes NCU might make because they can't force-push fixes to master to correct mistakes which can be sometimes necessary.

[gireeshpunathil]

I think the current triagers program doesn't make sense to me in its current format.

pls propose amendments in a separate issue, even if it is just to rename the team name.

we do need to be careful since currently if triagers can add labels to pull request they can effectively land stuff with ncu.

triagers can already add labels. their role definition does not contain landing stuff. there wasn't any role abuse of in the past.

[benjamingr]

@gireeshpunathil where should such an issue be open? In nodejs/node or nodejs/admin?

pls propose amendments in a separate issue, even if it is just to rename the team name.

I think this is relevant since if it's the "collaborator-interns" or "collaborators-in-training" or similar team then giving them full CI access makes perfect sense to me as well as other collaborator like priviledges.

triagers can already add labels. their role definition does not contain landing stuff. there wasn't any role abuse of in the past.

Yes though I suspect the ability to trigger CI and land stuff is something that triagers got happenstance as a side-effect of their ability to add labels right?

[gireeshpunathil]

@benjamingr -

• in terms of the target repo, I would think core repo
• in terms of team name, I guess not all triagers would want to become collaborators (at least by definition)
• in terms of CI access as a side effect of label - agree.

[Trott]

@benjamingr The ability to start CI was intentional, not a side-effect of another ability, or at least that's always been my impression. I want triagers to be able to run CI and to land PRs that meet the requirements for landing (passed CI, collaborator approval, sufficient wait time).

I do not think we should rename triagers to "collaborator interns" etc. because it implies that it is a step toward becoming a collaborator, which it can be, but it definitely is not necessarily. People can be triagers forever and not become collaborators, even if that is not (so far, at least) the usual path. The expectations of triagers is that they will do triage, not that they are collaborators-in-training. If someone like bricss (who watches the repo and obviously cares about Node.js but for whatever reason doesn't open a whole lot of pull requests and doesn't seem interested in participating in governance etc.) wanted to become a triager and remain a triager forever, that is a feature of the program, not a bug. Someone who is a triager and never becomes a collaborator has not "failed" or "stalled" or anything like that.

I'm going to hide this comment as off-topic, but will likely copy/paste it into any issue that proposes renaming triagers.