add review comment to sb files

[oleksandr-didyk]

Add review comment to SourceBuild* files

• You've read the Contributor Guide and Code of Conduct.
• You've included unit or integration tests for your change, where applicable.
• You've included inline docs for your change, where applicable.
• There's an open issue for the PR that you are making. If you'd like to propose a new feature or change, please open an issue to discuss the change or find an existing issue.

Summary of the changes (Less than 80 chars)

Add comment to SourceBuild* files asking to include source-build team in PRs.

Description

Contributes to dotnet/source-build#3435

Adds comments to source-build files asking for the inclusion of the source-build team in PRs that alter SourceBuild* files. Non-reviewed changes could potentially cause issues down the line, be it in the downstream repos or the product build (as has happened in the past, see dotnet/source-build#3435 (comment))

[ghost]

Hey @dotnet/aspnet-build, looks like this PR is something you want to take a look at.

[mitchdenny]

If this is for file-level review perhaps we could use GH owners file?

[oleksandr-didyk]

If this is for file-level review perhaps we could use GH owners file?

Initially wanted to add both the comment and the CODEOWNERS entry, but for a team to be added as a code owner it needs to have write permissions to the repo and I wanted to verify first if this is something we would need. I should've mentioned that in the description though, my bad, forgot to edit it.

If you are OK with granting write permissions to dotnet/source-build-internal, I will add the CODEOWNERS entry.

[mitchdenny]

Hrm, probably not.

[oleksandr-didyk]

Then unfortunately the comment is our best bet.

We will monitor how effective they are and will of course change / adapt based on performance. But for now this is a relatively cheap / easy option

[wtgodbe]

I'd be fine with giving dotnet/source-build-internal write access - we already have 500+ users with that level of access (everyone in dotnet/npt). Any objections @dotnet/aspnet-admins?

[amcasey]

Ping @dotnet/aspnet-admins

[wtgodbe]

@danmoseley, @mkArtak any opposition to giving dotnet/sorce-build-internal write access to the repo so that we can add them to Codeowners for this file?

[danmoseley]

@danmoseley, @mkArtak any opposition to giving dotnet/sorce-build-internal write access to the repo so that we can add them to Codeowners for this file?

if the owners of dotnet/source-build-internal believe that is reasonable, sure

[wtgodbe]

@oleksandr-didyk I've given dotnet/source-build-internal write access to the repo - feel free to update the PR to add the to CODEOWNERS for this file

[oleksandr-didyk]

Thank you, added the entry for the file

As for altering the comment to make it more visible (discussed below) - given the valid CODEOWNERS entry there is less pressure on the comment so I opted to keeping it the same as in other repositories

[amcasey]

Copyright headers have trained me to ignore the first two lines of most files. Personally, I'd make a bigger, bolder comment with multiple lines and some SHOUTING.

[oleksandr-didyk]

Copyright headers have trained me to ignore the first two lines of most files. Personally, I'd make a bigger, bolder comment with multiple lines and some SHOUTING.

Given the line count for the files I wanted to be less in-your-face-ish about it + rely on unaware contributors scanning the file to find any help when editing something they are unaware of.

Nevertheless, you are right that it could be more visible. Thank you for the comment, I'll think of how to highlight it better.