<div dir="ltr">I agree with Anne and Nick. In the case of questionable content, most of us tag other reviewers and wait a certain amount of time for them to review the patch. Also, larger patches already tend to remain in the review queue for a reasonable amount of time.</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 1:41 PM, Nicholas Chase <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:nchase@mirantis.com" target="_blank">nchase@mirantis.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="#000000"><span class="">
<br>
<div>On 9/8/2014 2:30 PM, Anne Gentle wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 1:23 PM,
Christian Berendt <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:berendt@b1-systems.de" target="_blank">berendt@b1-systems.de</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">I
would like to propose the introduction of a minimum time
before<br>
approving a new review request.<br>
<br>
Example: <a href="https://review.openstack.org/#/c/119783/" target="_blank">https://review.openstack.org/#/c/119783/</a><br>
<br>
Uploaded: Sep 8, 2014 4:59 PM<br>
First +2: 6:10 PM<br>
Second +2: 8:15 PM<br>
Approval: 8:16 PM<br>
<br>
I think we should wait at least 24 hours before approving
a new review<br>
request (exception: urgent or generated changes). This way
everybody of<br>
us has the chance to realize and review new review
requests.<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Interesting proposal, we did not address in <a href="https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Documentation/ReviewGuidelines" target="_blank">https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Documentation/ReviewGuidelines</a>
-- my feeling is that we can't all review all patches so
it's better to not enforce a minimum wait time. The
impatience people have with our reviews should be reversed
and we shouldn't have a policy of an enforced wait time.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>To me, it's preferred to have hundreds of patches go
through efficiently rather than ensure everyone sees every
patch.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Just my thinking though, would love to hear what others
have to say.</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br></span>
I think that it's a good thought to make sure that patches have
enough oversight, but it's unrealistic to have "everybody" look at a
patch; there's just not enough time, as evidenced by the backlog we
already have. If a patch goes through and someone has a concern,
opening a new bug is just a button-click away.<br>
<br>
I also agree that people (all over OpenStack, not just in Docs) are
already frustrated enough with the review process. ENSURING that it
takes a day will only make things worse, I would think.<br>
<br>
But perhaps if there's a patch that people are concerned about --
say something major is going on -- there's a way for us to flag it,
or maybe just to have the cores to +1 it temporarily just to show
that they're in favor, while it's being further reviewed?<br>
<br>
---- Nick<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
<br>
<div>-- <br>
Nick Chase <br>
<a href="tel:1-650-567-5640" value="+16505675640" target="_blank">1-650-567-5640</a><br>
Technical Marketing Manager, Mirantis<br>
Editor, OpenStack:Now<br>
<a href="http://openstacksv.com" target="_blank"><img src="cid:part4.04020703.09050105@mirantis.com"></a></div>
</font></span></div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Openstack-docs mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Openstack-docs@lists.openstack.org">Openstack-docs@lists.openstack.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-docs" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-docs</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>