Open Stack

On 17/09/14 16:40, Charles Crouch wrote:
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
>> Hi,
>>
>> as part of general housekeeping on our reviews, it was discussed at last
>> week's meeting [1] that we should set workflow -1 for stale reviews
>> (like gerrit used to do when I were a lad).
>>
>> The specific criteria discussed was 'items that have a -1 from a core
>> but no response from author for 14 days'. This topic came up again
>> during today's meeting and it wasn't clear if the intention was for
>> cores to start enforcing this? So:
>>
>> Do we start setting WIP/workflow -1 for those reviews that have a -1
>> from a core but no response from author for 14 days
>>
>> thanks, marios
>>
>> [1]
>> http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tripleo/2014/tripleo.2014-09-09-19.04.log.html
> 
> So it looks like this has already started..
> 
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/105275/
> 
> I think we need to document on the wiki *precisely* the criteria for setting 
> WIP/workflow -1. For example that review above has a Jenkins failure but no
> core reviews at all.

+1 on being precise - another case in point:

https://review.openstack.org/#/c/102304/

this review has a *-2* from core, which seems to 'stick' for future
revisions; the last revision is from > 14 days ago, so does this fulfill
the criteria (I'd say it doesn't)?

Not sure if you were also suggesting that -1 from Jenkins also counts,
which imo makes sense...

'items that have a -1 from core or jenkins, or a -2 from core on the
latest revision, and no response from author for 14 days'

Really this needs to be put as a motion and voted on in the next meeting,

thanks, marios


> 
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>