> On 27 Aug 2015, at 07:58, Evgeniy L <e...@mirantis.com> wrote: > > Hi Mike, > > I have several comments. > > >> SLA should be the driver of doing timely reviews, however we can’t allow > >> to fast-track code into master suffering quality of review ... > > As for me the idea of SLA contradicts to qualitative reviews.
We expect cores to be less loaded after this change, so you guys should have more time to spend on right reviews, and not minor stuff. We hope this will also help keeping SLAs. > Another thing is I got a bit confused by the difference between Core Reviewer > and Component Lead, > aren't those the same persons? Shouldn't every Core Reviewer know the > architecture, best practises > and participate in design architecture sessions? Not really. You can have many core reviewers, but there should be one component lead. Currently, while Fuel is monolithic, we cannot implement it in technical way. But if we succeed splitting Fuel into smaller projects, component lead will be responsible for (most likely) one repo. Regards, -- Tomasz 'Zen' Napierala Product Engineering - Poland __________________________________________________________________________ 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
