Open Stack

Ok sounds fair.  I guess I had misunderstood what nova had done, and thought it was a path to success.

I’m happy we can have the conversation about a mentorship program now at least in the Kolla project.

I’m not sure how to evaluate the cost of the mentorship program in terms of core reviewer time.  Perhaps we should start there.  I know core reviewers are swamped for bandwidth, however, I also feel making time for mentorship is essential to the project’s long term health.

I am also not sure if we have more individuals interested.  If only Rich is interested, that is only one person to mentor.  If 100 people are interested, that is beyond our capacity as a team to handle ☺

To help sort out the time commitment for core reviewers, I have started a “sign-up sheet” for folks interested in mentoring here:
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/kolla-mentorship-signup

Regards
-steve


From: "Serguei Bezverkhi (sbezverk)" <sbezverk at cisco.com>
Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
Date: Thursday, April 13, 2017 at 8:45 AM
To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][nova] Starting a core reviewer mentorship program for Kolla deliverables

The idea is great, no doubt here, meaning mentoring and everything, but it should not come with price of reducing quality control. 2 x +2 +w should still be required from “regular” cores for PS to merge.

Serguei

From: Richard Wellum [mailto:richwellum at gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2017 7:02 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][nova] Starting a core reviewer mentorship program for Kolla deliverables

As a relatively new member of the openstack community I think the idea of a mentorship program is a good one; I'd like to throw my hat in the ring if the kolla community needs a guinea-pig to try this on. :)

Rich

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 7:53 PM Matt Riedemann <mriedemos at gmail.com<mailto:mriedemos at gmail.com>> wrote:
On 4/12/2017 3:40 PM, Steven Dake (stdake) wrote:
> Matt,
>
> Thanks for the response.  It is helpful.
>
> Regards
> -steve
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matt Riedemann <mriedemos at gmail.com<mailto:mriedemos at gmail.com>>
> Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>>
> Date: Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 4:36 PM
> To: "openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>" <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>>
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][nova] Starting a core reviewer mentorship program for Kolla deliverables
>
>     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://OpenStack-dev-request@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
>
>     __________________________________________________________________________
>     OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>     Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe<http://OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe>
>     http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe<http://OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe>
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>

By the way, I should add, while we look for a +1 from a subteam or
domain expert, it does not equate to a +2 so that a core can come along
and +2/+W. We still require 2 +2s.

--

Thanks,

Matt

__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe<http://OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe>
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20170413/8a6bb004/attachment.html>