It can, by running your own... but again it seems far better for
core reviewers to decide if a change has potential or needs to be
abandoned--that way there's an accountable human making that
deliberate choice rather than the review team hiding behind an
automated process so that no one is to blame for hurt feelings
besides the infra operators who are enforcing this draconian measure
for you.
The thing is that it's also pushing more work onto already overloaded
core review teams. Maybe submitters don't like auto-abandon, but I bet
they like having a core reviewer spending time cleaning up dead reviews
instead of reviewing their change even less.
TBH, if someone's offended by the bot then I can't imagine how incensed
they must be when a human does the same thing. The bot clearly isn't
making it personal, and even if the human isn't either it's much easier
to have misunderstandings (see also every over-reaction to a -1 ever).
I suppose it makes it easier for cores to ignore reviews, but from the
other discussions I've read that hasn't gone away just because
auto-abandon did, so I'm not convinced that's a solution anyway.
+1, I don't think it'll come as much of a shock if a -1 review gets
closed due to time without progress.
/2 cents
To make the whole process a little friendlier we could increase
the time frame from 1 week to 2.
<snark>How about just automatically abandon any new change as soon
as it's published, and if the contributor really feels it's
important they'll unabandon it.</snark>
_______________________________________________
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
