Open Stack

I agree that Tempest core (or any OpenStack core) is meant to and should 
be a fluid thing where members drop in and out based on activity.

That having been said, I also agree with what Attila said in that people 
that are totally inactive, certainly should be dropped. Beyond that 
there should be an agreed metric for how someone is added or dropped and 
when it is changed.

A question for the group too. There seem to be several Quality related 
groups out there for OpenStack. There is OpenStack QA, OpenStack QA 
Core, Tempest Drivers and tempest-core. I assume OpenStack QA is the 
general QA related group. tempest-core is the Gerrit group that is 
configured as core review from openstack-infra (and I presume membership 
in this group is what is being discussed).

What then are OpenStack QA Core and Tempest Drivers? I apologize if I'm 
missing something obvious there.

--Sam

On 05/12/2013 07:56 AM, David Kranz wrote:
> The important issue here is what people are going to do in the next 
> six months, not what they did or did not do in the last 90 days. If we 
> look at the last 90 days, and the prospect of a growing number of 
> contributors, it seems clear to me that we need review days. We have 
> not come close to meeting the goals (24-48 hour turnaround) we set 
> when this was last discussed. So I suggest we resolve the core 
> reviewer issue by establishing review days and let  a commitment to 
> being part of the regular rotation determine who is a core reviewer or 
> not.
>
>  -David
>
> On 5/12/2013 12:10 AM, Venkatesan, Ravikumar wrote:
>> +1 .
>>
>> I agree with Attila.
>>
>> I would also like dwalleck and mordred continue to be 
>> openstack-qa-core members.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Ravi
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Attila Fazekas [mailto:afazekas at redhat.com]
>> Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2013 1:24 PM
>> To: All Things QA.
>> Subject: Re: [openstack-qa] Tempest core cleanup
>>
>> It is a big sudden change in our process.
>> I have no objection against removing the completely inactive members.
>>
>> 'dwalleck' has more reviews than the average and attending the QA 
>> meetings.
>> 'mordred' has commits from the past 90 days.
>>
>> I would preserve their membership for now.
>> We can discuss more stricter criteria for future usage.
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Sean Dague" <sean at dague.net>
>>> To: openstack-qa at lists.openstack.org
>>> Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2013 1:34:25 AM
>>> Subject: [openstack-qa] Tempest core cleanup
>>>
>>> I was asked today about some possible tempest core adds, and using
>>> russell's handy review-o-metric generator here is what the last 90 days
>>> look like:
>>>
>>> +----------------------+-----------------------------------+
>>> |       Reviewer       | Reviews (-2|-1|+1|+2) (+/- ratio) |
>>> +----------------------+-----------------------------------+
>>> |      sdague **       |      171 (4|56|0|111) (64.9%)     |
>>> |      cyeoh-0 **      |      162 (0|52|15|95) (67.9%)     |
>>> |     afazekas **      |      107 (1|18|25|63) (82.2%)     |
>>> |    david-kranz **    |       93 (0|14|6|73) (84.9%)      |
>>> |     treinish **      |       83 (1|35|2|45) (56.6%)      |
>>> |     jaypipes **      |       56 (0|12|2|42) (78.6%)      |
>>> |       ivan-zhu       |       35 (0|8|27|0) (77.1%)       |
>>> |   andrea-frittoli    |       23 (0|1|22|0) (95.7%)       |
>>> |         jogo         |       20 (0|4|16|0) (80.0%)       |
>>> |      donald-ngo      |       18 (0|5|13|0) (72.2%)       |
>>> | ravikumar-venkatesan |       15 (0|1|14|0) (93.3%)       |
>>> |     dwalleck **      |        13 (0|4|5|4) (69.2%)       |
>>> |       adalbas        |       13 (0|1|12|0) (92.3%)       |
>>> |       psedlak        |        11 (0|2|9|0) (81.8%)       |
>>> |        lauria        |       11 (0|0|11|0) (100.0%)      |
>>> |       prekarat       |        10 (0|4|6|0) (60.0%)       |
>>> |       gfidente       |       10 (0|0|10|0) (100.0%)      |
>>> |        igawa         |        6 (0|0|6|0) (100.0%)       |
>>> |       maurosr        |        5 (0|0|5|0) (100.0%)       |
>>> |        fungi         |        5 (0|0|5|0) (100.0%)       |
>>> |     rohitkarajgi     |        4 (0|1|3|0) (75.0%)        |
>>> |       dachary        |        3 (0|2|1|0) (33.3%)        |
>>> |         maru         |        3 (0|1|2|0) (66.7%)        |
>>> |    jerome-gallard    |        3 (0|0|3|0) (100.0%)       |
>>> |        ayoung        |        2 (0|1|1|0) (50.0%)        |
>>> |       unknown        |        2 (0|0|2|0) (100.0%)       |
>>> |     johngarbutt      |         1 (0|1|0|0) (0.0%)        |
>>> |    doug-hellmann     |         1 (0|1|0|0) (0.0%)        |
>>> |       cboylan        |         1 (0|1|0|0) (0.0%)        |
>>> |  armando-migliaccio  |         1 (0|1|0|0) (0.0%)        |
>>> |        akuno         |         1 (0|1|0|0) (0.0%)        |
>>> |        ymzk37        |        1 (0|0|1|0) (100.0%)       |
>>> |        tmello        |        1 (0|0|1|0) (100.0%)       |
>>> |       mriedem        |        1 (0|0|1|0) (100.0%)       |
>>> |       mpavlase       |        1 (0|0|1|0) (100.0%)       |
>>> |       mkollaro       |        1 (0|0|1|0) (100.0%)       |
>>> |        heckj         |        1 (0|0|1|0) (100.0%)       |
>>> |       dperaza        |        1 (0|0|1|0) (100.0%)       |
>>> |       bob-ball       |        1 (0|0|1|0) (100.0%)       |
>>> |        aloga         |        1 (0|0|1|0) (100.0%)       |
>>> +----------------------+-----------------------------------+
>>>
>>> There remains a pretty distinct line between the 6 core members at the
>>> top, and the rest of the pack, so now doesn't feel like the right time
>>> to add more folks. However, I'd really like to see more folks actively
>>> participating in reviews.
>>>
>>> It also turns out our core count isn't 6, it's 12, and with only 1/2 
>>> the
>>> core members being active at this point, I'd like to clean up the group
>>> a little. I think historically we've been in an add only mode, but it's
>>> important to realize this isn't an honor society, but it's a working
>>> role. And if folks aren't actively reviewing a lot of code it's better
>>> to remove them from the list. People can come back later if they start
>>> getting active in the community again through normal nomination 
>>> process:
>>>
>>> So I suggest we remove the following people from openstack-qa-core to
>>> have the group more reflective of those doing the core reviewing:
>>>
>>>           "blamar",
>>>           "bcwaldon",
>>>           "dwalleck",
>>>           "westmaas",
>>>           "corvus",
>>>           "mordred",
>>>
>>>
>>>     -Sean
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Sean Dague
>>> http://dague.net
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> openstack-qa mailing list
>>> openstack-qa at lists.openstack.org
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-qa
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> openstack-qa mailing list
>> openstack-qa at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-qa
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> openstack-qa mailing list
>> openstack-qa at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-qa
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> openstack-qa mailing list
> openstack-qa at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-qa