review response time matches up to accepted practices in infosec for quantifying risk exposure in terms of incident response times.
so this is actually a suggest best practice in other areas. -matt On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 10:30 AM, Russell Bryant <[email protected]> wrote: > On 06/28/2013 12:18 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: > > Hey I made the list! > > > > _https://review.openstack.org/#/c/25355/_ > > > > Just wanted to point out for nova in longest-waiting reviews based on > > first revision: > > > > > > 1. 94 days, 12 hours, 49 minutes > > - _https://review.openstack.org/25355_ (PowerVM resize and migrate test > > cases) > > > > This one is a bit skewed because it was abandoned due to inactivity and > > then I picked it back up by assigning the bug to myself and contributing > > to the original review. > > > > Is there a way to take that into account in the metrics? Or is this a > > process issue, i.e. should I have left this abandoned and pushed up a > > new review based on the original? > > I think what you did is definitely the right thing to do. The stat is > still accurate for how long it is taking to get the patch to completion. > Having some really high numbers here doesn't worry me, because it's > reality, and is often out of the control of reviewers. > > -- > Russell Bryant > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
