On Thu, 2012-05-03 at 19:14 +0200, Andre Klapper wrote: > While peer reviews are great, **in some projects** teams miss manpower > already to have reviews at all, without any peer.
If one doesn't have any peers for a particular project, yes, clearly there's no one to review. However we should be able to do significantly better than we are at building out the peering relationships between individual components. > (And if you are a first-time contributor and you never receive feedback > on your first patch you give up and won't know where to escalate. That's > where GNOME's contributor base remains small.) > > https://bugzilla.gnome.org/browse.cgi?product=FOO provides a link at the > right to the list of unreviewed patches for the project FOO. > Two examples: > * gtk+: 637 unreviewed patches; 480 of them older than 12 months > * gnome-shell: 125 unreviewed; 61 of them older than 6 months That does seem very high, but note some of these *have* been reviewed, and both the reporter and reviewer agree there's a needs-work state. > I wonder if anybody has ideas how (and time) to clean up, e.g. by > setting "needs-rework" Right; offhand my guess is that's the effective state for at least 30-40% of these. > Or agreeing > in a team to have maximum XX unreviewed patches by 3.6.0 or so. It's going to be a continual process I think; setting hard targets might help. Just talking about it will help too as we are now =) FWIW, I marked some gnome-shell needs-work/rejected patches as such so something happened besides words... _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
