Hi folks,

I agree with Florin, rebase will waste a lot of CI. What about the following:
 1) auto-abandon moved to 10 days of inactivity (maybe with a clear message 
about what it means: this is not a rejection, but a nudge for the author to 
rebase and chase maintainers - not sure what is says currently)
 2) a patch that was verified more than 7 days ago looses its CI +1 with a 
clear message this needs a rebase to be verified again. Also acts as a nudge 
prior to auto-abandon (and the message may state that after 10 days of 
inactivity this is going to be abandon)

This should allow us to keep the queue manageable and also nudge authors and 
reviewers.
Now, the bigger problem I think is that we are lacking active maintainers: my 
review queue keep growing although I try to review a few patches everyday. With 
auto-abandon we probably filter out some low-priority stuff (because if authors 
cannot be bothered to reopen/rebase it is a sign of low commitment) but still, 
it is hard to keep up in the AI era.

Best
ben

________________________________________
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of Florin Coras via 
lists.fd.io <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2026 4:50
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] Improving VPP gerrit queue management & rebasing

Hi Dave,

Auto rebasing patches that have not been reviewed is going to waste a lot of 
our CI’s capacity. It makes sense to rebase patches only after review and if 
stale, where stale could be days, or weeks.

If the queue is a concern, I do agree that we can auto-abandon patches after 10 
days as they can be rebased/reopened later. Maintainers should be able to see 
patches assigned to them, so looking them up even if the queue is long 
shouldn’t be a problem.

Regards,
Florin

On Oct 27, 2026, at 8:12 PM, Dave Wallace via lists.fd.io 
<[email protected]> wrote:

Folks,

There was a discussion at today's VPP Community meeting related to my previous 
email on rebasing gerrit changes weekly [0] and figuring out a better way to 
manage the VPP gerrit queue. Something needs to be done to help reduce the 
burden on code reviewers and reduce the time to get a gerrit change merged 
after passing CI verification. Having more folks review gerrit changes would 
help a lot, but would not reduce the friction with the current incoming rate of 
code submissions.

The two main concerns under discussion are
1. Merging patches that have not been verified recently (within 7 days), is 
increases the risk of a test escape due to the lack of testing of a gerrit 
change on top of the latest merged changes.
2. The gerrit queue is so long (~ 250 presently) that scanning the gerrit queue 
is burdensome for reviewers

The Envoy project handles this by requiring a submitter to actively engage with 
the reviewers after passing the test metrics.  If an Envoy PR remains untouched 
by either a reviewer or submitter for 7 days, the PR is automatically closed. 
This does a good job with #2 but does not solve #1 because a PR that is 
reopened is not required to be rebased.

Presently, there is daily github workflow [2] that both creates a vpp gerrit 
report and implements the 180 day auto-abandon process. Of major consequence to 
several solutions discussed, is the fact that gerrit 'resets the clock' when 
any attribute is changed.  Thus, suggestions like auto-rebasing or clearing the 
Verified status will nullify the auto-abandon algorithm and allow the queue to 
grow without limits (as was the case prior to the implementation of the 
auto-abandon algorithm).

My initial suggestion was to simply change the auto-abandon window from 180 
days to 10 days, but like the envoy solution that does not solve issue #1.  
Perhaps the gerrit report script could detect and force a rebase for any gerrit 
change which was restored in conjunction with the reduction of the auto-abandon 
window to 10 days.  However, any gerrit change which required manual merge 
conflict resolution could not be automatically rebased.

The discussion was ended without coming to a conclusion, thus I am seeking 
input from the community as a whole.

Please reply to this thread with your feedback and/or any alternative proposal 
to address the two issues under discussion.

Thanks,
-daw-

[0] https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/topic/please_rebase_your_gerrit/121904738
[1] 
https://github.com/envoyproxy/envoy/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#submitting-a-pr
[2] https://github.com/vpp-dev/vpp-gerrit-report




-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#27306): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/27306
Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/121971803/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/leave/14379924/21656/631435203/xyzzy 
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

  • ... Dave Wallace via lists.fd.io
    • ... Florin Coras via lists.fd.io
      • ... Benoit Ganne (bganne) via lists.fd.io
        • ... Dave Wallace via lists.fd.io
          • ... Stanislav Zaikin via lists.fd.io
            • ... Vratko Polak -X (vrpolak - PANTHEON TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco) via lists.fd.io

Reply via email to