Open Stack

review response time matches up to accepted practices in infosec for
quantifying risk exposure in terms of incident response times.

so this is actually a suggest best practice in other areas.

-matt


On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 10:30 AM, Russell Bryant <rbryant at redhat.com> wrote:

> On 06/28/2013 12:18 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote:
> > Hey I made the list!
> >
> > _https://review.openstack.org/#/c/25355/_
> >
> > Just wanted to point out for nova in longest-waiting reviews based on
> > first revision:
> >
> >
> > 1.        94 days, 12 hours, 49 minutes
> > - _https://review.openstack.org/25355_ (PowerVM resize and migrate test
> > cases)
> >
> > This one is a bit skewed because it was abandoned due to inactivity and
> > then I picked it back up by assigning the bug to myself and contributing
> > to the original review.
> >
> > Is there a way to take that into account in the metrics?  Or is this a
> > process issue, i.e. should I have left this abandoned and pushed up a
> > new review based on the original?
>
> I think what you did is definitely the right thing to do.  The stat is
> still accurate for how long it is taking to get the patch to completion.
>  Having some really high numbers here doesn't worry me, because it's
> reality, and is often out of the control of reviewers.
>
> --
> Russell Bryant
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20130628/66d98920/attachment.html>