Skip to content

[skip ci] Removing former Grunts #53

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

[skip ci] Removing former Grunts #53

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion CODEOWNERS
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1 +1 @@
* @brikis98 @pete0emerson
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

imho remove all, way to much formalism for such repo :)

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Um... this is such a critical repo for so many modules. Why do you think it needs LESS safeguards?

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this codeowners file is repo wide, not per folder.
any repowide codeowners can be done as gh repo config. right?
codeowners is useless here.

also codeowners does not state who allowed to modify code,
but gh tf config does.
more people can modify than listed in codeowners.

Copy link

@dzmitry-lahoda dzmitry-lahoda Jun 27, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

see #64

in reality none codeowners looked or approved and yet merged.
so codeowners useless process here.

codeowners mostly for monorepos. this is not monorepo.

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

not working sadeguard is LESS safeguards actually.
removing will add more by not obscuring reality.

so i suggest more security actually;) also gh tf.

* @brikis98