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, 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 +0000, 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 team members need to have the flexibility to balance >>> their various conflicting workloads in a way that maximises their >>> own productivity. >> >> So does everyone else, surely? Are you saying 'I don't think I can >> commit to regular reviewing', or are you saying 'all reviewers will be >> unable to commit to regular reviewing'? Or something else? > > 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 > balance their time between reviews and coding work on an ongoing basis, > just as any other member of the community can. > > Regards, > Daniel > -- > |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| > |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| > |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| > |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| > > _______________________________________________ > 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