Adding inexperienced cores doesn't really alleviate that issue though, and I don't currently feel that there is anyone with the right balance of experience and activity to be added to the core team.
Me and Richard monitor review activity very closely though, and we are actively looking to grow the team. We just need more activity from reviewers so that they can learn, and in turn we can teach them. I don't expect people to know everything before being core - I certainly didn't - but I don't think the bar is being met just yet. Rob On 1 March 2017 at 10:36, Beth Elwell <beth.openst...@gmail.com<mailto:beth.openst...@gmail.com>> wrote: Has there been any consideration of growing the core team to help with review bandwidth? I ask only because that resulting responsibility to the community can drive additional review activity. Just worried that only 1x +2 could cause issues with code being merged on a project this large that could potentially break things or clash with other opinions or standards of how it should be written/implemented? It concerns me that it makes it easier to overlook larger things in more substantial patches. I guess as you say, there needs to be accountability re not always going for the single +2 when the patch is of that sort of size and you need a second opinion? Beth > On 28 Feb 2017, at 10:09, Rob Cresswell > <robert.cressw...@outlook.com<mailto:robert.cressw...@outlook.com>> wrote: > > Hey everyone, > > Horizon is moving to requiring only a single core review for code approval. > Note that cores are not obliged to approve on a single +2; if a core would > like a second opinion for patches that are complex or high risk, that is also > fine. > > We still require at least one of the core reviewers or contributor on a patch > to be from separate companies however. For example, if a patch is authored by > someone from Cisco, then I could not (as a Cisco employee) +2+w the patch by > myself; it would require at least another core +2. > > This should help us move smaller patches along quicker. > > Rob > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: > openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe<http://openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe<http://openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
