Open Stack

Hi,

seems like not all people agrees on what should be the 'metric' of a 
core reviewer.
Also what justify us to give +1 or +2.

Could it be a topic on today's meeting?

Ladislav


On 10/07/2013 09:03 PM, 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.
>
> 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: it's not
> a purely mechanical process :).
>
> As we've just merged review teams with Tuskar devs, we need to allow
> some time for everyone to get up to speed; so for folk who are core as
> a result of the merge will be retained as core, but November I expect
> the stats will have normalised somewhat and that special handling
> won't be needed.
>
> IMO these are the reviewers doing enough over 90 days to meet the
> requirements for core:
>
> |       lifeless **        |     349    8 140   2 199    57.6% |    2
> (  1.0%)  |
> |     clint-fewbar **      |     329    2  54   1 272    83.0% |    7
> (  2.6%)  |
> |         cmsj **          |     248    1  25   1 221    89.5% |   13
> (  5.9%)  |
> |        derekh **         |      88    0  28  23  37    68.2% |    6
> ( 10.0%)  |
>
> Who are already core, so thats easy.
>
> If you are core, and not on that list, that may be because you're
> coming from tuskar, which doesn't have 90 days of history, or you need
> to get stuck into some more reviews :).
>
> Now, 30 day history - this is the heads up for folk:
>
> | clint-fewbar **  |     179    2  27   0 150    83.8% |    6 (  4.0%)  |
> |     cmsj **      |     179    1  15   0 163    91.1% |   11 (  6.7%)  |
> |   lifeless **    |     129    3  39   2  85    67.4% |    2 (  2.3%)  |
> |    derekh **     |      41    0  11   0  30    73.2% |    0 (  0.0%)  |
> |      slagle      |      37    0  11  26   0    70.3% |    3 ( 11.5%)  |
> |    ghe.rivero    |      28    0   4  24   0    85.7% |    2 (  8.3%)  |
>
>
> 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'. James and Ghe, good stuff -
> you're well on your way to core. If you're not in that list, please
> treat this as a heads-up that you need to do more reviews to keep on
> top of what's going on, whether so you become core, or you keep it.
>
> In next month's update I'll review whether to remove some folk that
> aren't keeping on top of things, as it won't be a surprise :).
>
> Cheers,
> Rob
>
>
>
>
>
>