Peter Tribble <[email protected]> wrote: > Integration requires code review. One issue we do have is that we could do > with more code reviewers.
Even though this seems to be correct for most putbacks, it is not true in general. > As a statistic, here is (roughly) the distribution of how many reviewers per > commit. > > 0 12 > 1 483 > 2 1316 > 3 884 > 4 437 > 5 139 > 6 59 > 7 13 > 8 14 > 9 3 > 15 1 > > There's clearly a peak at 2-3 reviewers. I suspect that for many simple > changes > people see it's been reviewed and move on. > > (Of the 12 with no reviews, 10 are post-commit fixups, 1 is a typo in the > commit > message, only 1 [5524] appears to have no reviewers listed.) Statistically this looks OK, if there was no putback without code review. BTW: How did you create your statistic? I see that 2964, 2408, 2831, 852, 509, 345, 225, 244, 59, 58, 38, 2, have no review and I know that related code is buggy in a way that could have been avoided by a code review. In other words, a quick check identifies more than 12 putbacks without code review and some of them have visible bugs; my method to look for those putbacks is very simple and I may have missed many other putbacks without code review. In addition, there is 354 which has been added even though there have been several unfixed bugs identified by the code review of the related code. BTW: These bugs are still unfixed. > There's nothing missing from the IPS format either, and that's trivial to > convert > to other formats. It's just much easier to only maintain the metadata once. IPS misses the meta data that is needed to permit a split / & /usr > > The advantage of the format is that it supports a split / and /usr and > > this is > > something I do not like to miss for future options. > > > > Split / and /usr is completely unrelated to packaging. That may be your private opinion. I know that IFS misses meta data for this purpose. Jörg -- EMail:[email protected] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [email protected] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sf.net/projects/schilytools/files/' ------------------------------------------ illumos-discuss Archives: https://illumos.topicbox.com/groups/discuss/discussions/T784fc87098d66577-M86e1110687831879cf1832e0 Powered by Topicbox: https://topicbox.com
