<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#333333">
Hi Chris,<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2013/08/10 13:13, Chris Jones wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAHWFm4dAyU8E_11DhvL-a6X0+zwgO5TL9GQ8EqU2HZ1QwFcDnQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">Hi
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 8 October 2013 11:59, Jaromir
Coufal <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:jcoufal@redhat.com" target="_blank">jcoufal@redhat.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#333333">Â Â * Example: It
doesn't make sense, that someone who is core-reviewer
based on image-builder is able to give +2 on UI or CLI
code and vice-versa.<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I'm not sure this is a technical problem as much as a
social problem - if someone isn't able to give a good
review (be it -1/+1 or +2) on a particular change, they
should just not review it, regardless of which part of the
project it relates to.</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
I completely agree on this point. It depends on people's judgement.<br>
<br>
Question is if we will depend only on this judgment or we help that
with splitting reviewers based on projects. I believe that the split
can help us. Anyway, it is just proposal it depends what others
think about that.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAHWFm4dAyU8E_11DhvL-a6X0+zwgO5TL9GQ8EqU2HZ1QwFcDnQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div>I'm a tripleo core reviewer, but I have been ignoring
the tuskar reviews until I have had some time to play with
it and get a feel for the code. You can argue that I
therefore shouldn't even have the power to give a +2 on
tuskar code, but I would note that before Robert added me
to core he wasn't simply watching the quantity of my
reviews, he was also giving me feedback on areas I was
going wrong. I would imagine that if I was wildly throwing
around inappropriate reviews on code I wasn't qualified to
review, he would give me feedback on that too and
ultimately remove me as a reviewer.</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
Well it depends on the approach, if we think first or second way. I
might argue that you shouldn't have the +2 power for Tuskar until
you have bigger contribution on Tuskar code (reviews or patches or
...). Just for me it sounds logical, because you are not that close
to it and you are not familiar with all the background there.<br>
<br>
If somebody will be contributing regularly there, he can become
core-reviewer on that project as well. <br>
<br>
If you did bad code reviews on Tuskar and you were removed the
'core-' status, you still can do excellent job on other TripleO
projects, so why to lose it at all of them?<br>
<br>
Let me give one example:<br>
There is tuskar-client which is very important project and there is
not that big activity as in other projects. There are people who
actually wrote the whole code and based on the amount of work
(reviews), they doesn't have to get between core-reviewers. In the
future, if they need to move forward or quickly fix something, they
would need to ask some core-reviewer who is not familiar with that
code, just to approve it.<br>
<br>
You see where I am getting?<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAHWFm4dAyU8E_11DhvL-a6X0+zwgO5TL9GQ8EqU2HZ1QwFcDnQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Perhaps this is something that won't scale well, but I
have a great deal of faith in Robert's judgement on who is
or isn't reviewing effectively. <br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
I have no experience with Rob's distribution of core-members and I
believe that he does it based on his best faith.<br>
<br>
I am just suggesting more project based approach since the whole
program expanded into more projects. It doesn't have to be strict
project based metric, it can be combined with 'across projects
contribution', so we assure that people are aware of the whole
effort. But I believe that the project focus should stay as primary
metric.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAHWFm4dAyU8E_11DhvL-a6X0+zwgO5TL9GQ8EqU2HZ1QwFcDnQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div><br>
</div>
-- <br>
<div dir="ltr">
Cheers,
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Chris</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Thanks<br>
-- Jarda<br>
</body>
</html>