On 29 August 2013 17:33, Christopher Yeoh cbky...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 15:56:33 +
Joshua Harlow harlo...@yahoo-inc.com wrote:
Shrinking that rotation granularity would be reasonable to. Rotate
once every 2 weeks or some other time period still seems useful to me.
I
On 2013-08-29 00:28, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 09:58:48 -0400
Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com wrote:
On a related note, I really like when the developer adds a gerrit
comment saying why the revision, that makes my life as a reviewer
easier.
+1 - I try to remember to do
On 08/29/2013 04:25 AM, Robert Collins wrote:
On 29 August 2013 17:33, Christopher Yeoh cbky...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 15:56:33 +
Joshua Harlow harlo...@yahoo-inc.com wrote:
Shrinking that rotation granularity would be reasonable to. Rotate
once every 2 weeks or some other
] Frustrations with review wait times
On 29 August 2013 17:33, Christopher Yeoh cbky...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 15:56:33 +
Joshua Harlow harlo...@yahoo-inc.com wrote:
Shrinking that rotation granularity would be reasonable to. Rotate
once every 2 weeks or some other time period
Sure, I can see both ways.
It's not easy to find a perfect solution, especially in opensource with such a
diverse community. How do other projects handle this? I would think the kernel
would have a similar issue, or hadoop or other diverse and large opensource
projects.
Sent from my really
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 12:45:26PM +1000, Michael Still 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
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 03:43:21AM +, Joshua Harlow wrote:
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
On 28 August 2013 21:13, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 03:43:21AM +, Joshua Harlow wrote:
For a big project like nova the workload could be spread out more
like that.
I don't think any kind of rotation system like that is really
practical. Core
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 10:29:23PM +1200, Robert Collins wrote:
On 28 August 2013 21:13, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 03:43:21AM +, Joshua Harlow wrote:
For a big project like nova the workload could be spread out more
like that.
I don't
On 28 August 2013 22:39, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
No, IIUC, Joshua was suggesting that core team members spend one cycle
doing reviews only, with no coding, and then reverse for the next cycle.
That is just far too coarse/crude. Core team members need to be free to
...@robertcollins.net
To: Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com
Cc: OpenStack Development Mailing List openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2013 6:51:22 AM
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Frustrations with review wait times
On 28 August 2013 22:39, Daniel P. Berrange
Robert Collins wrote:
So I'd like to throw two ideas into the mix.
Firstly, consider having a rota - ideally 24x5 but that will need some
more geographical coverage I suspect for many projects - of folk who
spend a dedicated time period only reviewing.
We have been doing that in the past
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Frustrations with review wait times
On 28 August 2013 22:39, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
No, IIUC, Joshua was suggesting that core team members spend one cycle
doing reviews only, with no coding, and then reverse for the next
cycle
On 08/28/2013 10:58 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Robert Collins wrote:
So I'd like to throw two ideas into the mix.
Firstly, consider having a rota - ideally 24x5 but that will need some
more geographical coverage I suspect for many projects - of folk who
spend a dedicated time period only
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Frustrations with review wait times
On 08/28/2013 10:58 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Robert Collins wrote:
So I'd like to throw two ideas into the mix.
Firstly, consider having a rota - ideally 24x5
On 08/28/2013 05:10 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
IOW we should
prioritize review of work whose authors submitted earlier to encourage
good practice with early submission.
+1.
Can we reconfigure Gerrit to show oldest first rather than newest first
by default?
(next-review does this.
On 08/28/2013 10:31 AM, Gary Kotton wrote:
Hi,
I am not sure that there is a good solution. I guess that we all need to
'vasbyt' (that is Afrikaans for bite the bullet) and wait for the code posted
to be reviewed. In Neutron when we were heading towards the end of a cycle and
there were a ton
Shrinking that rotation granularity would be reasonable to. Rotate once every 2
weeks or some other time period still seems useful to me.
Sent from my really tiny device...
On Aug 28, 2013, at 3:43 AM, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 10:29:23PM +1200,
: OpenStack Development Mailing List
openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2013 6:51:22 AM
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Frustrations with review wait times
On 28 August 2013 22:39, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
No, IIUC, Joshua was suggesting
On 08/28/2013 10:31 AM, Gary Kotton wrote:
Hi,
I am not sure that there is a good solution. I guess that we all need to
'vasbyt' (that is Afrikaans for bite the bullet) and wait for the code posted
to be reviewed. In Neutron when we were heading towards the end of a cycle and
there were a ton
On 08/28/2013 12:25 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
If each little group had at least one active Nova core member, i think
it would speed things up way faster IMHO.
Agreed, in theory. However, we should not add someone just for the sake
of having someone on the team from a certain area. They
+1000 Russell
-- dims
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 1:06 PM, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
On 08/28/2013 12:25 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
If each little group had at least one active Nova core member, i think
it would speed things up way faster IMHO.
Agreed, in theory. However,
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
On 08/28/2013 12:25 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
If each little group had at least one active Nova core member, i think
it would speed things up way faster IMHO.
Agreed, in theory. However, we should not add someone just for
On 08/28/2013 01:22 PM, Johannes Erdfelt wrote:
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
On 08/28/2013 12:25 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
If each little group had at least one active Nova core member, i think
it would speed things up way faster IMHO.
Agreed, in theory.
On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 09:58:48 -0400
Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com wrote:
On a related note, I really like when the developer adds a gerrit
comment saying why the revision, that makes my life as a reviewer
easier.
+1 - I try to remember to do this and from a reviewer point of view this
is
On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 15:56:33 +
Joshua Harlow harlo...@yahoo-inc.com wrote:
Shrinking that rotation granularity would be reasonable to. Rotate
once every 2 weeks or some other time period still seems useful to me.
I wonder if the quality of reviewing would drop if someone was doing it
all
On 08/27/2013 10:43 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
I tend to focus the bulk of my review activity on the libvirt driver,
since that's where most of my knowledge is. I've recently done some
reviews outside this area to help reduce our backlog, but I'm not
so comfortable approving stuff in many
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 10:55:03AM -0400, Russell Bryant wrote:
On 08/27/2013 10:43 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
I tend to focus the bulk of my review activity on the libvirt driver,
since that's where most of my knowledge is. I've recently done some
reviews outside this area to help
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.comwrote:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 10:55:03AM -0400, Russell Bryant wrote:
On 08/27/2013 10:43 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
I tend to focus the bulk of my review activity on the libvirt driver,
since that's where most
On Aug 27, 2013, at 18:40 , Joe Gordon
joe.gord...@gmail.commailto:joe.gord...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Daniel P. Berrange
berra...@redhat.commailto:berra...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 10:55:03AM -0400, Russell Bryant wrote:
On 08/27/2013 10:43 AM,
@lists.openstack.orgmailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Frustrations with review wait times
On Aug 27, 2013, at 18:40 , Joe Gordon
joe.gord...@gmail.commailto:joe.gord...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Daniel P. Berrange
berra
On 08/27/2013 01:30 PM, Matt Dietz wrote:
Good idea!
Only thing I would point out is there are a fair amount of changes,
especially lately, where code is just moving from one portion of the
project to another, so there may be cases where someone ends up being
authoritative over code they
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 12:14 PM, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
On 08/27/2013 01:30 PM, Matt Dietz wrote:
Good idea!
Only thing I would point out is there are a fair amount of changes,
especially lately, where code is just moving from one portion of the
project to another,
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org,
Date: 08/27/2013 01:19 PM
Subject:Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Frustrations with review wait
times
On 08/27/2013 01:30 PM, Matt Dietz wrote:
Good idea!
Only thing I would point out is there are a fair amount of changes,
especially lately, where
On 28 August 2013 06:32, John Griffith john.griff...@solidfire.com wrote:
All great ideas, but really isn't the core of the issue rate of new patches
rate of available reviewers?
Seems to me that with the growth of the projects and more people
contributing the number of people actively
Definitely, +1 ;-)
--
Shane
From: Joe Gordon [mailto:joe.gord...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 11:40 PM
To: Daniel P. Berrange; OpenStack Development Mailing List
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Frustrations with review wait times
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Daniel P
[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
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
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 12:15 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
Joshua, I do not think such a strict and coarse scheduling is a practical
way to manage developers, who have highly individualized talents,
backgrounds, and interests.
Regards,
Mike
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
-Original Message-
From: Michael Still [mailto:mi...@stillhq.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 7:45 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Frustrations with review wait times
[Concerns over review wait times in the nova project]
I think
41 matches
Mail list logo
