I suggest discussing the implementation details on phabricator. Moreover, I second Lucas point on the tone. physikerwelt https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct
physikerwelt https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 1:43 PM Lucas Werkmeister <lucas.werkmeis...@wikimedia.de> wrote: > > Am Di., 22. Jan. 2019 um 13:25 Uhr schrieb Chad <innocentkil...@gmail.com>: > > > Dumb straw man. > > > > can we avoid this tone? thanks > > Who said these people have too much workload? > > > Um, Thiemo himself has said this? Are you going to tell him that he’s wrong > about his own workload? > > The blame attribution has zero insight into how > > busy someone is. > > > > Correct, which is why it’s a bad idea to let it run loose and add people > who are already busy enough as reviewers. > > > > If it's a low-traffic repository there's likely to be fewer overall > > contributors. > > Fewer contributors increases the likelihood of people being qualified to > > review--whereas a high-traffic repo is more likely to have drive-by > > contributor less capable. > > > > Well, many drive-by contributions are tree-wide: they are applied to a > large set of repositories collectively, e. g. all Wikimedia-deployed > extensions or even all repositories. If a repository has generally low > traffic, then these tree-wide drive-by contributions will make up a larger > ratio of its commits than in repositories with more repository-specific > commits. > > I’m not sure if I phrased this well, but if repository A has 1000 specific > commits and 10 drive-by commits, and repository B has 20 specific commits > and the same 10 drive-by commits, then the drive-by commits will be ⅓ of > all commits in repository B but less than .1% in repository A. > > > > And if it's just one-line typofixing it'd be ideal to exclude those from > > the > > blame list--but we can't possibly know what was a one-line typofix and > > what was a one line that saved us 50% of execution time on all pages. > > At least not programmatically. > > > > True to some extent, but then we should err on the side of not adding the > reviewer, no? Otherwise we run the risk of overwhelming them with changes > they’re not even qualified to review, even if they had the time. > > > > Honestly, if you think "people who've edited the code in the past" are a > > poor > > person to ask for review then you do not understand how code review works. > > > > Suggesting that Thiemo doesn’t understand how code review works is… bold, > in my opinion, let’s put it that way. May I point out that he’s one of the > top +2ers across all MediaWiki extensions > <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2019-January/091340.html>? > > Cheers, > Lucas > > > -- > Lucas Werkmeister > Full Stack Developer > > Wikimedia Deutschland e. V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin > Phone: +49 (0)30 219 158 26-0 > https://wikimedia.de > > Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the > sum of all knowledge. Help us to achieve our vision! > https://spenden.wikimedia.de > > Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V. > Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter > der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für > Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/029/42207. > _______________________________________________ > Wikitech-l mailing list > Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
