Open Stack

On 06/02/2014 12:17 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 6:57 AM, Sean Dague <sean at dague.net> wrote:
>> Towards the end of the summit there was a discussion about us using a
>> shared review dashboard to see if a common view by the team would help
>> accelerate people looking at certain things. I spent some time this
>> weekend working on a tool to make building custom dashboard urls much
>> easier.
>>
>> My current proposal is the following, and would like comments on it:
>> https://github.com/sdague/gerrit-dash-creator/blob/master/dashboards/qa-program.dash
>>
>> All items in the dashboard are content that you've not voted on in the
>> current patch revision, that you don't own, and that have passing
>> Jenkins test results.
>>
>> 1. QA Specs - these need more eyes, so we highlight them at top of page
>> 2. Patches that are older than 5 days, with no code review
>> 3. Patches that you are listed as a reviewer on, but haven't voting on
>> current version
>> 4. Patches that already have a +2, so should be landable if you agree.
>> 5. Patches that have no negative code review feedback on them
>> 6. Patches older than 2 days, with no code review
>>
>> These are definitely a judgement call on what people should be looking
>> at, but this seems a pretty reasonable triaging list. I'm happy to have
>> a discussion on changes to this list.
>>
>> The url for this is -  http://goo.gl/g4aMjM
>>
>> (the long url is very long:
>> https://review.openstack.org/#/dashboard/?foreach=%28project%3Aopenstack%2Ftempest+OR+project%3Aopenstack-dev%2Fgrenade+OR+project%3Aopenstack%2Fqa-specs%29+status%3Aopen+NOT+owner%3Aself+NOT+label%3AWorkflow%3C%3D-1+label%3AVerified%3E%3D1%2Cjenkins+NOT+label%3ACode-Review%3C%3D-1%2Cself+NOT+label%3ACode-Review%3E%3D1%2Cself&title=QA+Review+Inbox&QA+Specs=project%3Aopenstack%2Fqa-specs&Needs+Feedback+%28Changes+older+than+5+days+that+have+not+been+reviewed+by+anyone%29=NOT+label%3ACode-Review%3C%3D2+age%3A5d&Your+are+a+reviewer%2C+but+haven%27t+voted+in+the+current+revision=reviewer%3Aself&Needs+final+%2B2=%28project%3Aopenstack%2Ftempest+OR+project%3Aopenstack-dev%2Fgrenade%29+label%3ACode-Review%3E%3D2+limit%3A50&Passed+Jenkins%2C+No+Negative+Feedback=NOT+label%3ACode-Review%3E%3D2+NOT+label%3ACode-Review%3C%3D-1+limit%3A50&Wayward+Changes+%28Changes+with+no+code+review+in+the+last+2days%29=NOT+label%3ACode-Review%3C%3D2+age%3A2d
>>
>> The url can be regenerated easily using the gerrit-dash-creator.
>>
>>         -Sean
>>
>> --
>> Sean Dague
>> http://dague.net
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
> 
> What do you think about tying this to the list of repositories in the
> governance repo (like https://review.openstack.org/#/c/92597/) and
> generating similar dashboards for all of the programs that way?

That would be possible, realistically I expect that different programs
might think about their review flows differently. I consider the example
dashboards there to be that, examples, which I find very useful (and
actively use most of them on a daily basis).

 In the qa-program case we roughly agreed on that prioritizing criteria
at the summit, so I feel like there is group buy in. I wouldn't want to
assume that the review priorities we set automatically applied to other
program's cultures.

IIRC the swift team had some other queries they found useful, hopefully
this would make it really easy for them to build a team dashboard (which
could be in the tree or not, however they feel like it).

	-Sean

-- 
Sean Dague
http://dague.net

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 482 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20140602/0d995212/attachment.pgp>