MAINT: Adjust Pull-Request labeler configuration

[jjerphan]

Reference issue

Follow-up of #16870

What does this implement/fix?

This adapts the labeler configuration to resolve issues exposed in #16870 (comment).

Additional information

This is still WIP.

cc @tupui

[tupui]

Thanks @jjerphan for following up on this 😃

[jjerphan]

I am coming back to this PR after an eternity: I plan to maintain the changes of
actions/labeler#113 on my fork in the meantime. I still need to assert whether it works or not. If it does, would depending on this fork work for you or would you prefer depending on actions/labeler solely?

[tupui]

@jjerphan sorry for the delay, I was away.

If the fix in the reported issue works with the original repo, that would be better. We would prefer not to depend on custom actions (extra work to maintain) unless they are used by other large projects.

[jjerphan]

@jjerphan sorry for the delay, I was away.

It's fine. Congrats for getting a CZI grant to pursue your work on Scipy! 🥳

If the fix in the reported issue works with the original repo, that would be better. We would prefer not to depend on custom actions (extra work to maintain) unless they are used by other large projects.

So do I, in this case this PR is blocked.

What should we do? Should we wait for actions/labeler#113 to be integrated or should revert changes of #16870 in the meantime?

[tupui]

Thanks!

[jjerphan]

Hi @tupui, I am coming back to you after another eternity.

actions/labeler#480 which pursues actions/labeler#113 is on the verge to be approved. I think the best is that we wait for it to be merged before taking further decisions.

[tupui]

Thanks! Let's do that. Seems like a new team is taking this over, great news.

[tupui]

LGTM, seen this in-person. In it goes, thanks Julien 😃

[jjerphan]

See those PRs to check behavior with the setup on my fork:

• test: Pull Request Labeler on newly created PR manually labelled jjerphan/scipy#6
• test: Pull Request Labeler on open PR originally without labels jjerphan/scipy#5

[jjerphan]

Hi @j-bowhay,

I have seen that you have been triaging issues and PRs lately.

I am interested to know what you think of the setup this CI brought to see if this can be refined.

[j-bowhay]

I think it is working well. One possible point for further improvement would be to pick off the acronym (eg. MAINT) and map this to a label as at the moment this still has to be done manually.