On 27/03/17 08:47 -0400, Dan Prince wrote:
On Mon, 2017-03-27 at 13:49 +0200, Flavio Percoco wrote:On 24/03/17 17:16 -0400, Dan Prince wrote: > On Thu, 2017-03-23 at 16:20 -0600, Alex Schultz wrote: > > Hey folks, > > > > So after looking at the backlog of patches to review across all > > of > > the > > tripleo projects, I noticed we have a bunch of really old stale > > patches. I think it's time we address when we can abandon these > > stale > > patches. > > > > Please comment on the proposed policy[0]. I know this has > > previously > > been brought up [1] but I would like to formalize the policy so > > we > > can > > reduce the backlog of stale patches. If you're wondering what > > would > > be abandoned by this policy as it currently sits, I have a gerrit > > dashboard for you[2] (it excludes diskimage-builder) . > > I think it is fine to periodically review patches and abandon them > if > need be. Last time this came up I wasn't in fan of auto-abandoning > though. Rather I just made a pass manually and did it in fairly > short > order. The reason I like the manual approach is a lot of ideas > could > get lost (or silently ignored) if nobody acts on them manually. > > Rather then try to automate this would it serve us better to add a > link > to your Gerrit query in [2] below to highlight these patches and > quickly go through them.I used to do this in Glance. I had 2 scripts that ran every week. The first one would select the patches to abandon and comment on them saying that the patches would be abandoned in a week. The second script abandoned the patches that had been flagged to be abandoned that were not updated in a week.I don't think a week is enough time to react in all cases though. There could be a really good idea that comes in, gets flagged as abandoned and then nobody thinks about it again because it got abandoned. There is sometimes a fine line between automation that helps humans do their job better... and automation that goes to far. I don't think TripleO or Glance projects have enough patch volume that it would take the core team more than an hour to triage patches that need to be abandoned. We probably don't even need to do this weekly. Once a month, or once a quarter for that matter would probably be fine I think.
The Glance team did have a high volume of patches at the time and a week was actually enough to request feedback. Glance bot wouldn't have abandoned the patch if there was activity on it, even just a comment saying: "Don't abandon" Running the script weekly worked well in Glance's case too. Also, FWIW, my email is just to share what we did in Glance. I'm not suggesting it'll work for TripleO. Flavio -- @flaper87 Flavio Percoco
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
__________________________________________________________________________ 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
