For everyone's reference, the tripleo-specs stats can be found here: http://www.nemebean.com/reviewstats/tripleo-specs-30.txt
Note that looking at the stats, over 30 days 1 review per week is only 4, which most of our cores are already doing anyway. I'm not sure codifying a requirement to do at least that is going to help much. To move the needle I'm thinking we would need at least 3 - most of our cores aren't meeting that today so it would actually require everyone to do more reviews. Spec reviews are difficult and tend to take a significant amount of time, so that would be a considerable increase in time commitments for cores. I'm not sure how I feel about that, although I'm probably biased because I'm not at 3 per week right now. :-) -Ben On 2014-07-22 15:18, Jay Dobies wrote: > At the meetup today, the topic of our spec process came up. The > general sentiment is that the process is still young and the hiccups > are expected, but we do need to get better about making sure we're > staying on top of them. > > As a first step, it was proposed to add 1 spec review a week to the > existing 3 reviews per day requirement for cores. > > Additionally, we're going to start to capture and review the metrics > on spec patches specifically during the weekly meeting. That should > help bring to light how long reviews are sitting in the queue without > being touched. > > What are everyone's feelings on adding a 1 spec review per week > requirement for cores? > > Not surprisingly, I'm +1 for it :) > > _______________________________________________ > 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