Open Stack

On 07/23/2014 06:22 AM, Kyle Mestery wrote:
> Thanks for sending this out Salvatore. We are way oversubscribed,
> and at this point, I'm in agreement on not letting any new
> exceptions which do not fall under the above guidelines. Given how
> much is already packed in there, this makes the most sense.

The increasing time to merge patches and the increasing backlog was a
topic that came up during the Board meeting on Tuesday. Signals seem to
point at not enough core reviewers in many projects as one of the causes
of these issues.  I have signed up to analyze this more carefully so
that the board can come up with suggestions/requirements to members
organization. Stay tuned for more.

For the short term, though, a careful analysis and exercise in
prioritization together with extra efforts for reviews from the parties
involved would be great.

On 07/24/2014 07:05 AM, CARVER, PAUL wrote:
> I don't really follow Linux kernel development, but a quick search 
> turned up [1] which seems to indicate at least one additional level 
> between

It's hard to drive parallels across such different projects. I would
consider Andrew and Linus our release managers (stable vs current) and
subsystem maintainers the equivalent of our PTLs, the driver maintainers
as our 'core reviewers'. I don't think there are more layers on the
kernel. BTW, I heard that in April OpenStack may have surpassed the
kernel in terms of monthly commits, so we're comparable in size.

> Speaking only for myself and not AT&T, I'm disappointed that my 
> employer doesn't have more developers actively writing code. We ought
> to (in my personal opinion) be supplying core reviewers to at least a
> couple of OpenStack projects.

Yes, I would expect any company the size of ATT be providing at least 1
developer upstream for 10 developers downstream. I'll be looking at some
numbers to check if there is a general behavior around this, mabye come
up with recommendations. Stay tuned.

/stef

-- 
Ask and answer questions on https://ask.openstack.org