Closed as not planned
Description
Would it be possible to to request a revisit of requirements for a Rewiever ? At the moment it contains the following
### Requirements
The following apply to the part of codebase for which one would be a reviewer in
an [OWNERS] file (for repos using the bot).
- Member for at least 3 months
- Primary reviewer for at least 5 PRs to the codebase
- Reviewed or merged at least 20 substantial PRs to the codebase
- Knowledgeable about the codebase
- Sponsored by a subproject approver
- With no objections from other approvers
- Done through PR to update the OWNERS file
- May either self-nominate, be nominated by an approver in this subproject, or be nominated by a robot
But what about issues, who is looking after them, and why the contributions to resolve issues do not count? Qute often issue is just a question and one could point to correct answer, in which case no pull request is created. Or there are duplicates issues and etc. Quite often repositories have quite significant number of open issues, they abandoned for ages and closed by the bots as no activity from members.
We could add something like
-Issue Contributions:
- Resolved at least 10 issues.or provided significant contributions to them
Rationale for Changes:
- Issue Contributions:
- Includes requirements for issue contributions to recognize valuable contributions beyond just pull requests.
This revised set of requirements aims to:
- Better reflect the value of issue contributions: Acknowledge the importance of active participation in issue discussions and resolution.
- Encourage broader community engagement: Recognize and reward various forms of contributions beyond just code changes.