chore(administration): add SMP as code owners for the "regression/" dir tree

[pront]

No description provided.

[datadog-vectordotdev]

Datadog Report

Branch report: pront-patch-1
Commit report: 3395a8f
Test service: vector

✅ 0 Failed, 7 Passed, 0 Skipped, 25.45s Total Time

[jszwedko]

I'd be curious to get @vectordotdev/single-machine-performance's thoughts here. I think they wouldn't really consider themselves the owners of the experiment definitions, just the infrastructure that executes them.

[pront]

I'd be curious to get @vectordotdev/single-machine-performance's thoughts here. I think they wouldn't really consider themselves the owners of the experiment definitions, just the infrastructure that executes them.

I thought they might need this for lading/SMP upgrades. But if not required, happy to close the PR.

[jszwedko]

I'd be curious to get @vectordotdev/single-machine-performance's thoughts here. I think they wouldn't really consider themselves the owners of the experiment definitions, just the infrastructure that executes them.

I thought they might need this for lading/SMP upgrades. But if not required, happy to close the PR.

You could define ownership over just the regression workflow definitions in .github/workflows and then also regression/config.yaml

[GeorgeHahn]

I'd be curious to get @vectordotdev/single-machine-performance's thoughts here. I think they wouldn't really consider themselves the owners of the experiment definitions, just the infrastructure that executes them.

I thought they might need this for lading/SMP upgrades. But if not required, happy to close the PR.

You could define ownership over just the regression workflow definitions in .github/workflows and then also regression/config.yaml

I think this would be preferable