Open Stack

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   6 265    59.3% |    9
> (  3.3%)  |
> |     clint-fewbar **      |     431    2  81   1 347    80.7% |   10
> (  2.9%)  |
> |         cmsj **          |     361    1  28   0 332    92.0% |   14
> (  4.2%)  |
> |        derekh **         |     150    0  30  13 107    80.0% |    3
> (  2.5%)  |
> |          slagle          |      98    0  20  78   0    79.6% |   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 **        |       9    0   2   0   7    77.8% |    0
> (  0.0%)  |
> |       devananda **       |       6    0   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   5 138    61.1% |    8 (  5.6%)  |
> | clint-fewbar **  |     218    1  48   0 169    77.5% |    6 (  3.6%)  |
> |     cmsj **      |     180    1   9   0 170    94.4% |    4 (  2.4%)  |
> |    derekh **     |      96    0  10   1  85    89.6% |    0 (  0.0%)  |
> |      slagle      |      70    0  13  57   0    81.4% |    7 ( 12.3%)  |
> |    lsmola **     |      53    1  14  16  22    71.7% |    4 ( 10.5%)  |
> |    rpodolyaka    |      49    0  15  34   0    69.4% |    4 ( 11.8%)  |
> |       jogo       |      45    0   5  40   0    88.9% |    2 (  5.0%)  |
> |    ifarkas **    |      39    0   5   4  30    87.2% |    3 (  8.8%)  |
> |     jistr **     |      36    0  10   7  19    72.2% |    2 (  7.7%)  |
> |   tzumainn **    |      34    0   9   2  23    73.5% |    1 (  4.0%)  |
> |    ghe.rivero    |      32    0   5  27   0    84.4% |    5 ( 18.5%)  |
> 
> -core that are not keeping up...:
> |   tomas-8c8 **   |      23    0   5   1  17    78.3% |    3 ( 16.7%)  |
> |    pblaho **     |      19    0   2   3  14    89.5% |    1 (  5.9%)  |
> |    marios **     |      14    0   1  12   1    92.9% |    1 (  7.7%)  |
> |    jomara **     |      10    0   0   0  10   100.0% |    1 ( 10.0%)  |
> |   arata776 **    |       9    0   2   0   7    77.8% |    0 (  0.0%)  |
> |   jtomasek **    |       7    0   0   0   7   100.0% |    0 (  0.0%)  |
> |   devananda **   |       5    0   0   0   5   100.0% |    0 (  0.0%)  |
> |   jprovazn **    |       3    0   0   3   0   100.0% |    1 ( 33.3%)  |
> 
> Please remember - the stats are just an entry point to a more detailed
> discussion about each individual, and I know we all have a bunch of
> work stuff, particularly in the lead up to the summit!
> 
> I'm using the fairly simple metric of 'average at least one review a
> day' as a proxy for 'sees enough of the code and enough discussion of
> the code to be an effective reviewer'. The one review a day thing I
> derive thusly:
>  - reading a single patch a day is a low commitment to ask for
>  - if you don't have time to do that, you will get stale quickly -
> you'll only see
>    about 20% of the code changes going on (we're doing about 5 commits
> a day and hopefully not slowing down!)
> 
> Cheers,
> Rob
>