Why not a rotation though, I could see it beneficial to say have a group of active developers code for say a release then those developers rotate to a reviewer position only (and rotate again for every release). This allows for a flow of knowledge between reviewers and a different set of coders (instead of a looping flow since reviewers are also coders).
For a big project like nova the workload could be spread out more like that. Just a thought... Might not be feasible but could be a idea to strive towards. Sent from my really tiny device... On Aug 27, 2013, at 7:48 PM, "Michael Still" <mi...@stillhq.com> wrote: > [Concerns over review wait times in the nova project] > > I think that we're also seeing the fact that nova-core's are also > developers. nova-core members have the same feature freeze deadline, > and that means that to a certain extent we need to stop reviewing in > order to get our own code ready by the deadline. > > The strength of nova-core is that its members are active developers, > so I think a "reviewer caste" would be a mistake. I am also not saying > that nova-core should get different deadlines (although more leniency > with exceptions would be nice). > > So, I think lower review rates around deadlines are just a fact of life. > > Michael > > -- > Rackspace Australia > > _______________________________________________ > 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
