Open Stack

On 4/12/2017 11:59 AM, Steven Dake (stdake) wrote:
> Hey folks,
>
>
>
> In today’s Kolla team meeting, the idea was proposed of adopting nova’s
> “protocore” mentorship program for Kolla.  We would like to know what
> nova has learned from this effort.
>
>
>
> In today’s Kolla meeting we had broad consensus on the following:
>
> 1)       Kolla has participants that want to be core reviewers
>
> 2)       These participants don’t know how to become core reviewers
>
> 3)       The core reviewers in Kolla should mentor “protocore” reviewers
> on how to do good reviews
>
>
>
> From that, we concluded some form of mentorship program for potential
> core reviewers was in order.  We got into some debate about _/how/_ the
> program should be rolled out.  Let’s use this thread to discuss how it
> should be rolled out since that seems to be the sticking point of the
> discussion.  I saw no dissent in the discussion that the basic concepts
> were a negative change.
>
>
>
> I am aware that nova uses a +1 review from a “protocore” and a +2/+w
> from a core reviewer prior to merge.  Nova cores – would you mind
> defining your process (on the ml is fine) more thoroughly and your
> experiences so we can learn from you?
>
>
>
> All kolla contributors, feel free to debate the **how** such a
> mentorship program should be rolled out.  I think we have a lot to learn
> from our peers in the OpenStack community and learning from their
> experiences may be helpful.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
> -steve
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>

Nova has this thing? That's news to me. :)

I don't think Nova has a formal process for something like this. There 
was talk at the BCN summit about giving some people +2 rights on parts 
of the tree but not full core on everything. We never implemented that.

Maybe what you're referring to is how we consider a +1 from a domain 
expert like a +2, or at least something that's good to have before cores 
are looking into the change in more detail? For example, gibi is the 
lead for the versioned notifications effort and we/I generally look for 
his +1 on a change before digging into it, or approving it. We have 
similar unofficial things like this in other parts of Nova, or subteams, 
like Timofey and Pawel with the live migration subteam.

To be sure, someone that is leading a subteam effort and is looked to 
for their opinion on a whole series of changes eventually gets into the 
conversation when we're talking about potential core reviewers, in part 
because, at least I personally, am looking for not only strong code 
review skills but also leadership/ownership within the project, because 
those are also the people that tend to stick around awhile so I'm more 
comfortable investing my time into them (and building a trust 
relationship with them).

So that's all unofficial non-formal stuff and basically grew up 
organically around the subteam efforts that started several releases 
ago. I don't know if this helps you or not.

-- 

Thanks,

Matt