[openstack-dev] Code review study
dolph.mathews at gmail.com
Thu Aug 15 17:19:41 UTC 2013
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 12:00 PM, Mark Washenberger <
mark.washenberger at markwash.net> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 5:12 AM, Christopher Yeoh <cbkyeoh at gmail.com>wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Robert Collins <
>> robertc at robertcollins.net> wrote:
>>> This may interest data-driven types here.
>>> Note specifically the citation of 200-400 lines as the knee of the
>>> review effectiveness curve: that's lower than I thought - I thought 200 was
>>> clearly fine - but no.
>> Very interesting article. One other point which I think is pretty
>> relevant is point 4 about getting authors to annotate the code better (and
>> for those who haven't read it, they don't mean comments in the code but
>> separately) because it results in the authors picking up more bugs before
>> they even submit the code.
>> So I wonder if its worth asking people to write more detailed commit logs
>> which include some reasoning about why some of the more complex changes
>> were done in a certain way and not just what is implemented or fixed. As it
>> is many of the commit messages are often very succinct so I think it would
>> help on the review efficiency side too.
> Good commit messages are important, but I wonder if a more direct approach
> is for submitters to put review notes for their patches directly in gerrit.
> That allows annotation to be directly in place, without the burden of
++ I've done this myself when I can anticipate the questions that reviewers
are going to ask anyway. The best way to get your code merged quickly is to
make it as easy to review as possible!
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the OpenStack-dev