> Thu Sep 18 12:18:49 UTC 2014 >> On 2014-09-18 08:06:11 +0000 (+0000), Sullivan, Jon Paul wrote: >> In my experience if the check results are not fresh enough the >> recheck is automatically run. I am not on the infra team, so >> without looking up code I am just guessing, but my guess is that >> the workflow score change triggers the check on the presumption >> that it has been approved, not accounting for the recent(ish) >> update that move wip to the workflow score. > > We turned off that behavior a couple months ago when the merge-check > pseudo-job was implemented to automatically -1 any open changes with > merge conflicts each time a new change merges to their target > branch. This covered the majority of the problems identified by the > freshness check, but without using any of our worker pool. > >> This is not solely about finding reviews. It is about pruning >> stale reviews. I think the auto-abandon code was excellent at >> doing this, but alas, it is no more. > > I think it was excellent at arbitrarily abandoning open changes > which happened to meet a poorly-thought-out set of criteria. I'm > personally quite glad it broke and we didn't waste time > reimplementing something similar for new Gerrit versions.
I think that this thread has already clearly stated that core reviewers saw a benefit from the auto-abandon code. I think that the abandoning happening from an automated process is easier to accept than if it came from a person, and so less likely to create a poor and emotional response. If your personal opinion was that it wasn't useful to your project, then perhaps what you are really saying is that the implementation of it was not configurable enough to allow individual projects to tailor it to their needs. The auto-abandon code also produced other side effects that have already been detailed in this thread, such as reminding authors they need to take action upon a change. This is done automatically without the need for core reviewers to spend extra time deliberately looking for patches that need a nudge. So the removal of the auto-abandon, imho, has increased core reviewer workload, increased the chance that a good change may get ignored for extended periods of time, and has increased the possibility of code committers becoming frustrated with core reviewers adding a wip or abandon to their patches, so a decrease in productivity all around. :( > > -- > Jeremy Stanley Thanks, *: jonpaul.sulli...@hp.com :) Cloud Services - @hpcloud *: +353 (91) 75 4169 Postal Address: Hewlett-Packard Galway Limited, Ballybrit Business Park, Galway. Registered Office: Hewlett-Packard Galway Limited, 63-74 Sir John Rogerson's Quay, Dublin 2. Registered Number: 361933 The contents of this message and any attachments to it are confidential and may be legally privileged. If you have received this message in error you should delete it from your system immediately and advise the sender. To any recipient of this message within HP, unless otherwise stated, you should consider this message and attachments as "HP CONFIDENTIAL".
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
