Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] TripleO core reviewer update - november
On 30.10.2013 10:06, Robert Collins wrote: Hi, like most OpenStack projects we need to keep the core team up to date: folk who are not regularly reviewing will lose context over time, and new folk who have been reviewing regularly should be trusted with -core responsibilities. In this months review: - James Slagle for -core +1 - Arata Notsu to be removed from -core +1 - Devananda van der veen to be removed from -core +1 Existing -core members are eligible to vote - please indicate your opinion on each of the three changes above in reply to this email. James, please let me know if you're willing to be in tripleo-core. Arata, Devananda, if you are planning on becoming substantially more active in TripleO reviews in the short term, please let us know. ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] TripleO core reviewer update - november
Excerpts from Robert Collins's message of 2013-10-30 02:06:38 -0700: > Hi, like most OpenStack projects we need to keep the core team up to > date: folk who are not regularly reviewing will lose context over > time, and new folk who have been reviewing regularly should be trusted > with -core responsibilities. > > In this months review: > - James Slagle for -core +1 > - Arata Notsu to be removed from -core +1 > - Devananda van der veen to be removed from -core +1 ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] TripleO core reviewer update - november
On 30/10/13 18:16 +, Joe Gordon wrote: On Oct 30, 2013 9:10 AM, "Robert Collins" wrote: Hi, like most OpenStack projects we need to keep the core team up to date: folk who are not regularly reviewing will lose context over time, and new folk who have been reviewing regularly should be trusted with -core responsibilities. In this months review: - James Slagle for -core +1 - Arata Notsu to be removed from -core +1 - Devananda van der veen to be removed from -core +1 Existing -core members are eligible to vote - please indicate your opinion on each of the three changes above in reply to this email. -- Jordan O'Mara Red Hat Engineering, Raleigh pgpPi39jmD_dK.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] TripleO core reviewer update - november
On Oct 30, 2013 9:10 AM, "Robert Collins" wrote: > > Hi, like most OpenStack projects we need to keep the core team up to > date: folk who are not regularly reviewing will lose context over > time, and new folk who have been reviewing regularly should be trusted > with -core responsibilities. > > In this months review: > - James Slagle for -core > - Arata Notsu to be removed from -core > - Devananda van der veen to be removed from -core > > Existing -core members are eligible to vote - please indicate your > opinion on each of the three changes above in reply to this email. > James, please let me know if you're willing to be in tripleo-core. > Arata, Devananda, if you are planning on becoming substantially more > active in TripleO reviews in the short term, please let us know. > > My approach to this caused some confusion last time, so I'll try to > frame this better :) - I'm going to talk about stats here, but they > are only part of the picture : folk that aren't really being /felt/ as > effective reviewers won't be asked to take on -core responsibility, > and folk who are less active than needed but still very connected to > the project may still keep them : it's not pure numbers. > > Also, it's a vote: that is direct representation by the existing -core > reviewers as to whether they are ready to accept a new reviewer as > core or not. This mail from me merely kicks off the proposal for any > changes. As I am not core, no vote on the three people above. But wanted to say I like the model outlined in this email. > > But, the metrics provide an easy fingerprint - they are a useful tool > to avoid bias (e.g. remembering folk who are just short-term active) - > human memory can be particularly treacherous - see 'Thinking, Fast and > Slow'. > > With that prelude out of the way: > > Please see Russell's excellent stats: > http://russellbryant.net/openstack-stats/tripleo-reviewers-30.txt > http://russellbryant.net/openstack-stats/tripleo-reviewers-90.txt > > For joining and retaining core I look at the 90 day statistics; folk > who are particularly low in the 30 day stats get a heads up so they > aren't caught by surprise. > > Our merger with Tuskar is still fairly recent; folk from the Tuskar > project who are reviewing widely within TripleO are still low on the > mechanical stats - I think we should keep them as -core for another > month unconditionally, after which there will be three months of > history to inform us about broad activity. > > 90 day active-enough stats: > > +--+---++ > | Reviewer | Reviews -2 -1 +1 +2+/- % | > Disagreements* | > +--+---++ > | lifeless **| 457 17 169 6 26559.3% |9 > ( 3.3%) | > | clint-fewbar ** | 4312 81 1 34780.7% | 10 > ( 2.9%) | > | cmsj ** | 3611 28 0 33292.0% | 14 > ( 4.2%) | > |derekh ** | 1500 30 13 10780.0% |3 > ( 2.5%) | > | slagle | 980 20 78 079.6% | 10 > ( 12.8%) | > > James is coming along very well. I'd like to see a little more > critical analysis in his reviews, but I think his standard is high > enough now to carry the weight of -core. > > And the 90 day not-active-enough status: > > | arata776 **| 90 2 0 777.8% |0 > ( 0.0%) | > | devananda ** | 60 0 0 6 100.0% |0 > ( 0.0%) | > > Both Arata and Devananda are active in OpenStack as a whole, but I > think they're not tracking the TripleO project code changes closely > enough to wearing the -core mantle. I'd be delighted if they want to > rejoin as core - perhaps even after a shorter than usual ramp up > period if they get stuck in. We have this in nova, ex-cores get fast tracked if they start reviewing again. As they can catch up on context quicker and have already proven that there reviews are on par with what is expected from core. > > Now, 30 day history - this is the heads up for folk... > > Folk that are on track to retain/ be asked to be -core: > > | lifeless **| 234 11 80 5 13861.1% |8 ( 5.6%) | > | clint-fewbar ** | 2181 48 0 16977.5% |6 ( 3.6%) | > | cmsj ** | 1801 9 0 17094.4% |4 ( 2.4%) | > |derekh ** | 960 10 1 8589.6% |0 ( 0.0%) | > | slagle | 700 13 57 081.4% |7 ( 12.3%) | > |lsmola ** | 531 14 16 2271.7% |4 ( 10.5%) | > |rpodolyaka| 490 15 34 069.4% |4 ( 11.8%) | > | jogo | 450 5 40 088.9% |2 ( 5.0%) | > |ifarkas **| 390 5 4 3087.2% |3 ( 8.8%) | > | jistr ** | 360 10 7 1972.2% |2 ( 7.7%)
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] TripleO core reviewer update - november
On 30/10/13 09:06, Robert Collins wrote: > Hi, like most OpenStack projects we need to keep the core team up to > date: folk who are not regularly reviewing will lose context over > time, and new folk who have been reviewing regularly should be trusted > with -core responsibilities. > > In this months review: > - James Slagle for -core +1, James will be a good addition to the team. > - Arata Notsu to be removed from -core > - Devananda van der veen to be removed from -core Both removals look reasonable to me, +1 > > Existing -core members are eligible to vote - please indicate your > opinion on each of the three changes above in reply to this email. > James, please let me know if you're willing to be in tripleo-core. > Arata, Devananda, if you are planning on becoming substantially more > active in TripleO reviews in the short term, please let us know. > > My approach to this caused some confusion last time, so I'll try to > frame this better :) - I'm going to talk about stats here, but they > are only part of the picture : folk that aren't really being /felt/ as > effective reviewers won't be asked to take on -core responsibility, > and folk who are less active than needed but still very connected to > the project may still keep them : it's not pure numbers. > > Also, it's a vote: that is direct representation by the existing -core > reviewers as to whether they are ready to accept a new reviewer as > core or not. This mail from me merely kicks off the proposal for any > changes. > > But, the metrics provide an easy fingerprint - they are a useful tool > to avoid bias (e.g. remembering folk who are just short-term active) - > human memory can be particularly treacherous - see 'Thinking, Fast and > Slow'. > > With that prelude out of the way: > > Please see Russell's excellent stats: > http://russellbryant.net/openstack-stats/tripleo-reviewers-30.txt > http://russellbryant.net/openstack-stats/tripleo-reviewers-90.txt > > For joining and retaining core I look at the 90 day statistics; folk > who are particularly low in the 30 day stats get a heads up so they > aren't caught by surprise. > > Our merger with Tuskar is still fairly recent; folk from the Tuskar > project who are reviewing widely within TripleO are still low on the > mechanical stats - I think we should keep them as -core for another > month unconditionally, after which there will be three months of > history to inform us about broad activity. > > 90 day active-enough stats: > > +--+---++ > | Reviewer | Reviews -2 -1 +1 +2+/- % | > Disagreements* | > +--+---++ > | lifeless **| 457 17 169 6 26559.3% |9 > ( 3.3%) | > | clint-fewbar ** | 4312 81 1 34780.7% | 10 > ( 2.9%) | > | cmsj ** | 3611 28 0 33292.0% | 14 > ( 4.2%) | > |derekh ** | 1500 30 13 10780.0% |3 > ( 2.5%) | > | slagle | 980 20 78 079.6% | 10 > ( 12.8%) | > > James is coming along very well. I'd like to see a little more > critical analysis in his reviews, but I think his standard is high > enough now to carry the weight of -core. > > And the 90 day not-active-enough status: > > | arata776 **| 90 2 0 777.8% |0 > ( 0.0%) | > | devananda ** | 60 0 0 6 100.0% |0 > ( 0.0%) | > > Both Arata and Devananda are active in OpenStack as a whole, but I > think they're not tracking the TripleO project code changes closely > enough to wearing the -core mantle. I'd be delighted if they want to > rejoin as core - perhaps even after a shorter than usual ramp up > period if they get stuck in. > > Now, 30 day history - this is the heads up for folk... > > Folk that are on track to retain/ be asked to be -core: > > | lifeless **| 234 11 80 5 13861.1% |8 ( 5.6%) | > | clint-fewbar ** | 2181 48 0 16977.5% |6 ( 3.6%) | > | cmsj ** | 1801 9 0 17094.4% |4 ( 2.4%) | > |derekh ** | 960 10 1 8589.6% |0 ( 0.0%) | > | slagle | 700 13 57 081.4% |7 ( 12.3%) | > |lsmola ** | 531 14 16 2271.7% |4 ( 10.5%) | > |rpodolyaka| 490 15 34 069.4% |4 ( 11.8%) | > | jogo | 450 5 40 088.9% |2 ( 5.0%) | > |ifarkas **| 390 5 4 3087.2% |3 ( 8.8%) | > | jistr ** | 360 10 7 1972.2% |2 ( 7.7%) | > | tzumainn **| 340 9 2 2373.5% |1 ( 4.0%) | > |ghe.rivero| 320 5 27 084.4% |5 ( 18.5%) | > > -core that are not keeping up...: > | tomas-8c8 ** | 23
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] TripleO core reviewer update - november
On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 5:06 AM, Robert Collins wrote: > Hi, like most OpenStack projects we need to keep the core team up to > date: folk who are not regularly reviewing will lose context over > time, and new folk who have been reviewing regularly should be trusted > with -core responsibilities. > > In this months review: > - James Slagle for -core > - Arata Notsu to be removed from -core > - Devananda van der veen to be removed from -core > > Existing -core members are eligible to vote - please indicate your > opinion on each of the three changes above in reply to this email. > James, please let me know if you're willing to be in tripleo-core. I'm willing. I plan to continue actively reviewing and contributing. Thanks! ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] TripleO core reviewer update - november
Hi On 30 October 2013 09:06, Robert Collins wrote: > - James Slagle for -core > Very +1 > - Arata Notsu to be removed from -core > +1 > - Devananda van der veen to be removed from -core > +1 Thanks to Arata and Devananda for their efforts to date (and of course the awesome work they are doing currently in other projects :) -- Cheers, Chris ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] [TripleO] TripleO core reviewer update - november
Hi, like most OpenStack projects we need to keep the core team up to date: folk who are not regularly reviewing will lose context over time, and new folk who have been reviewing regularly should be trusted with -core responsibilities. In this months review: - James Slagle for -core - Arata Notsu to be removed from -core - Devananda van der veen to be removed from -core Existing -core members are eligible to vote - please indicate your opinion on each of the three changes above in reply to this email. James, please let me know if you're willing to be in tripleo-core. Arata, Devananda, if you are planning on becoming substantially more active in TripleO reviews in the short term, please let us know. My approach to this caused some confusion last time, so I'll try to frame this better :) - I'm going to talk about stats here, but they are only part of the picture : folk that aren't really being /felt/ as effective reviewers won't be asked to take on -core responsibility, and folk who are less active than needed but still very connected to the project may still keep them : it's not pure numbers. Also, it's a vote: that is direct representation by the existing -core reviewers as to whether they are ready to accept a new reviewer as core or not. This mail from me merely kicks off the proposal for any changes. But, the metrics provide an easy fingerprint - they are a useful tool to avoid bias (e.g. remembering folk who are just short-term active) - human memory can be particularly treacherous - see 'Thinking, Fast and Slow'. With that prelude out of the way: Please see Russell's excellent stats: http://russellbryant.net/openstack-stats/tripleo-reviewers-30.txt http://russellbryant.net/openstack-stats/tripleo-reviewers-90.txt For joining and retaining core I look at the 90 day statistics; folk who are particularly low in the 30 day stats get a heads up so they aren't caught by surprise. Our merger with Tuskar is still fairly recent; folk from the Tuskar project who are reviewing widely within TripleO are still low on the mechanical stats - I think we should keep them as -core for another month unconditionally, after which there will be three months of history to inform us about broad activity. 90 day active-enough stats: +--+---++ | Reviewer | Reviews -2 -1 +1 +2+/- % | Disagreements* | +--+---++ | lifeless **| 457 17 169 6 26559.3% |9 ( 3.3%) | | clint-fewbar ** | 4312 81 1 34780.7% | 10 ( 2.9%) | | cmsj ** | 3611 28 0 33292.0% | 14 ( 4.2%) | |derekh ** | 1500 30 13 10780.0% |3 ( 2.5%) | | slagle | 980 20 78 079.6% | 10 ( 12.8%) | James is coming along very well. I'd like to see a little more critical analysis in his reviews, but I think his standard is high enough now to carry the weight of -core. And the 90 day not-active-enough status: | arata776 **| 90 2 0 777.8% |0 ( 0.0%) | | devananda ** | 60 0 0 6 100.0% |0 ( 0.0%) | Both Arata and Devananda are active in OpenStack as a whole, but I think they're not tracking the TripleO project code changes closely enough to wearing the -core mantle. I'd be delighted if they want to rejoin as core - perhaps even after a shorter than usual ramp up period if they get stuck in. Now, 30 day history - this is the heads up for folk... Folk that are on track to retain/ be asked to be -core: | lifeless **| 234 11 80 5 13861.1% |8 ( 5.6%) | | clint-fewbar ** | 2181 48 0 16977.5% |6 ( 3.6%) | | cmsj ** | 1801 9 0 17094.4% |4 ( 2.4%) | |derekh ** | 960 10 1 8589.6% |0 ( 0.0%) | | slagle | 700 13 57 081.4% |7 ( 12.3%) | |lsmola ** | 531 14 16 2271.7% |4 ( 10.5%) | |rpodolyaka| 490 15 34 069.4% |4 ( 11.8%) | | jogo | 450 5 40 088.9% |2 ( 5.0%) | |ifarkas **| 390 5 4 3087.2% |3 ( 8.8%) | | jistr ** | 360 10 7 1972.2% |2 ( 7.7%) | | tzumainn **| 340 9 2 2373.5% |1 ( 4.0%) | |ghe.rivero| 320 5 27 084.4% |5 ( 18.5%) | -core that are not keeping up...: | tomas-8c8 ** | 230 5 1 1778.3% |3 ( 16.7%) | |pblaho ** | 190 2 3 1489.5% |1 ( 5.9%) | |marios ** | 140 1 12 192.9% |1 ( 7.7%) | |jomara ** | 100 0 0 10 100.0% |1 ( 10.0%) | | arata776 **| 90 2 0 777.8% |0 ( 0
