Sorry to pile on, but: "this was not particularly the case for what our driver is concerned. As I already wrote, almost all the reviews so far have been related to unit tests or minor formal corrections."
As was pointed out by me in patch set 1 here: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/43592/ There was no unit test coverage for an entire module (nova.virt.hyperv.volumeops) before that patch. So while I agree that driver maintainers know their code the best and how it all works with the dirty details, but they are also going to be the ones to cut corners to get things fixed which usually shows up in a lack of test coverage - and that's a good reason to have external reviewers on everything, to keep us all honest. Thanks, MATT RIEDEMANN Advisory Software Engineer Cloud Solutions and OpenStack Development Phone: 1-507-253-7622 | Mobile: 1-507-990-1889 E-mail: mrie...@us.ibm.com 3605 Hwy 52 N Rochester, MN 55901-1407 United States From: Alessandro Pilotti <apilo...@cloudbasesolutions.com> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>, Date: 10/15/2013 10:39 AM Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Hyper-V] Havana status On Oct 15, 2013, at 18:14 , Duncan Thomas <duncan.tho...@gmail.com> wrote: On 11 October 2013 15:41, Alessandro Pilotti <apilo...@cloudbasesolutions.com> wrote: Current reviews require: +1 "de facto" driver X mantainer(s) +2 core reviewer +2A core reviewer While with the proposed scenario we'd get to a way faster route: +2 driver X mantainer +2A another driver X mantainer or a core reviewer This would make a big difference in terms of review time. Unfortunately I suspect it would also lead to a big difference in review quality, and not in a positive way. The things that are important / obvious to somebody who focuses on one driver are totally different, and often far more limited, than the concerns of somebody who reviews many drivers and core code changes. Although the eyes of somebody which comes from a different domain bring usually additional points of views and befits, this was not particularly the case for what our driver is concerned. As I already wrote, almost all the reviews so far have been related to unit tests or minor formal corrections. I disagree on the "far more limited": driver devs (at least in our case), have to work on a wider range of projects beside Nova (e.g.: Neutron, Cinder, Ceilometer and outside proper OpenStack OpenVSwitch and Crowbar, to name the most relevant cases). -- Duncan Thomas _______________________________________________ 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
<<image/gif>>
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
