[openstack-dev] [Nova] Spring cleaning nova-core

Jay Pipes jaypipes at gmail.com
Sun Dec 7 17:02:24 UTC 2014

On 12/07/2014 04:19 AM, Michael Still wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 7:03 PM, Gary Kotton <gkotton at vmware.com> wrote:
>> On 12/6/14, 7:42 PM, "Jay Pipes" <jaypipes at gmail.com> wrote:
> [snip]
>>> -1 on pixelbeat, since he's been active in reviews on
>>> various things AFAICT in the last 60-90 days and seems to be still a
>>> considerate reviewer in various areas.
>> I agree -1 for Padraig
> I'm going to be honest and say I'm confused here.
> We've always said we expect cores to maintain an average of two
> reviews per day. That's not new, nor a rule created by me. Padraig is
> a great guy, but has been working on other things -- he's done 60
> reviews in the last 60 days -- which is about half of what we expect
> from a core.
> Are we talking about removing the two reviews a day requirement? If
> so, how do we balance that with the widespread complaints that core
> isn't keeping up with its workload? We could add more people to core,
> but there is also a maximum practical size to the group if we're going
> to keep everyone on the same page, especially when the less active
> cores don't generally turn up to our IRC meetings and are therefore
> more "expensive" to keep up to date.
> How can we say we are doing our best to keep up with the incoming
> review workload if all reviewers aren't doing at least the minimum
> level of reviews?

Personally, I care more about the quality of reviews than the quantity. 
That said, I understand that we have a small number of core reviewers 
relative to the number of open reviews in Nova (~650-700 open reviews 
most days) and agree with Dan Smith that 2 reviews per day doesn't sound 
like too much of a hurdle for core reviewers.

The reason I think it's important to keep Padraig as a core is that he 
has done considerate, thoughtful code reviews, albeit in a smaller 
quantity. By saying we only look at the number of reviews in our 
estimation of keeping contributors on the core team, we are 
incentivizing the wrong behaviour, IMO. We should be pushing that the 
thought that goes into reviews is more important than the sheer number 
of reviews.

Is it critical that we get more eyeballs reviewing code? Yes, absolutely 
it is. Is it critical that we get more reviews from core reviewers as 
well as non-core reviewers. Yes, absolutely.

Bottom line, we need to balance between quality and quantity, and 
kicking out a core reviewer who has quality code reviews because they 
don't have that many of them sends the wrong message, IMO.


More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list