On 24/04/14 10:21, mar...@redhat.com wrote: > Hi, > > > just to wrap this up following discussion during this week's irc meeting > [1] (thanks for bringing it up Kyle) > > I didn't hear any -1 to the general idea of having designated review > times (and quite a few +1). One point raised in the weekly meeting by > Maru Newby was that this may not be effective by itself and that we > should rather choose to assign reviews to core devs for their lifecycle. > This obviously also makes a lot of sense (and perhaps some combination > of the above two would be most effective) - in any case Maru said he'll > have more to say on this proposal at summit. > > So I guess we draw a line under this for the moment. Thanks for your > responses and I'm very happy to see that the community is open to such > discussions/proposals from newcomers and that in general there is > agreement on trying to improve the review process, > > thanks! marios > > [1] > http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking/2014/networking.2014-01-06-21.02.log.html >
sorry, wrong 21st :) http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking/2014/networking.2014-04-21-21.02.log.html > > On 21/04/14 17:38, mar...@redhat.com wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I think both PTL candidates mentioned process improvements wrt >> contributions and reviews in their candidacy announcements. As a new >> Neutron dev I have seen that it is easy for reviews to go unnoticed, >> especially when they are stand-alone bug fixes that aren't part of a >> particular blueprint group (and so aren't discussed/highlighted at the >> various sub-team meetings). Of course this is also compounded by a >> seemingly heavy backlog of reviews. I realise that all core/non-core >> devs are doing as much as they can and though more cores will help, it >> takes a long time to develop people into this role. >> >> I was wondering if a 'review hour' would help. This is something Lucas >> Gomez told me about; the Ironic core team has a weekly hour slot in >> which they discuss x number of reviews and approve or -1 them. Besides >> getting reviews cleared quicker, it also opens the process up. It will >> allow new contributors to (more quickly) learn about the kinds of things >> core reviewers look for in a patch and also give real-time feedback >> (e.g. could just use #openstack-neutron for discussion during the hour). >> I feel that this could have an impact on the review backlog even if this >> only tackling the oldest 5 reviews for example. >> >> Do any of the core devs think this would be a good thing, and do you >> think you have the time for it? >> >> thanks, marios >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OpenStack-dev mailing list >> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
