Open Stack

On Sat, Dec 06, 2014 at 07:56:21AM +1100, Michael Still wrote:
> I used Russell's 60 day stats in making this decision. I can't find a
> documented historical precedent on what period the stats should be
> generated over, however 60 days seems entirely reasonable to me.
> 
> 2014-12-05 15:41:11.212927
> 
> Reviews for the last 60 days in nova
> ** -- nova-core team member
> +-----------------------------+---------------------------------------+----------------+
> |           Reviewer          | Reviews   -2  -1  +1  +2  +A    +/- %
> | Disagreements* |
> +-----------------------------+---------------------------------------+----------------+
> |         berrange **         |     669   13 134   1 521 194    78.0%
> |   47 (  7.0%)  |
> |           jogo **           |     431   38 161   2 230 117    53.8%
> |   19 (  4.4%)  |
> |          oomichi **         |     309    1 106   4 198  58    65.4%
> |    3 (  1.0%)  |
> |           danms **          |     293   34 133  15 111  43    43.0%
> |   12 (  4.1%)  |
> |         jaypipes **         |     290   10 108  14 158  42    59.3%
> |   15 (  5.2%)  |
> |         ndipanov **         |     192   10  78   6  98  24    54.2%
> |   24 ( 12.5%)  |
> |          klmitch **         |     190    1  22   0 167  12    87.9%
> |   21 ( 11.1%)  |
> |          cyeoh-0 **         |     184    0  70  10 104  41    62.0%
> |    9 (  4.9%)  |
> |          mriedem **         |     173    3  86   8  76  31    48.6%
> |    8 (  4.6%)  |
> |        johngarbutt **       |     164   19  79   6  60  24    40.2%
> |    7 (  4.3%)  |
> |         cerberus **         |     151    0   9  40 102  38    94.0%
> |    7 (  4.6%)  |
> |        mikalstill **        |     145    2   8   1 134  48    93.1%
> |    3 (  2.1%)  |
> |          alaski **          |     104    0   7   6  91  54    93.3%
> |    5 (  4.8%)  |
> |          sdague **          |      98    6  21   2  69  40    72.4%
> |    4 (  4.1%)  |
> |         russellb **         |      86    1  10   0  75  29    87.2%
> |    5 (  5.8%)  |
> |       p-draigbrady **       |      60    0  12   1  47  10    80.0%
> |    4 (  6.7%)  |
> |         belliott **         |      32    0   8   1  23  15    75.0%
> |    4 ( 12.5%)  |
> |        vishvananda **       |       8    0   2   0   6   1    75.0%
> |    2 ( 25.0%)  |
> |        dan-prince **        |       7    0   0   0   7   3   100.0%
> |    4 ( 57.1%)  |
> |         cbehrens **         |       4    0   2   0   2   0    50.0%
> |    1 ( 25.0%)  |
> 
> The previously held standard for core reviewer activity has been an
> _average_ of two reviews per day, which is why I used the 60 days
> stats (to eliminate vacations and so forth). It should be noted that
> the top ten or so reviewers are doing at lot more than that.
> 
> All of the reviewers I dropped are valued members of the team, and I
> am sad to see all of them go. However, it is important that reviewers
> remain active.

Given that the Nova core is horrifically overworked & understaffed,
I really think this being really counterproductive to the project
needs to do this. It is just making the bad situation we're in
even worse :-(

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: http://berrange.com      -o-    http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org              -o-             http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org       -o-         http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org       -o-       http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|