Joris, could we punt on this until after 1.0? Right now people focus on polishing things for the release and I would like to avoid any distractions.
On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 8:25 PM, Joris Van Remoortere <jo...@apache.org> wrote: > Your suggestion generally encompasses the spirit of what we will do after > we've given the community time to act on their own. The reason we will > likely go through them manually is that there will be some patches that > don't apply but for which the contributor would still like to resume work. > Ideally people going through their outbox will have more context for which > things definitely don't make sense to keep open, so the list of which I > will have to go through manually will be shorter ;-) > I think the right thing is to provide people time to take these actions > themselves. > > We will be going through review of the github pull requests (already a much > smaller list) in the upcoming week. > After that I hope the reviewboard list will be significantly shorter and we > will be able to go through reviews of the remaining patches with higher > confidence that we'll be able follow through on them with the contributor. > > On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 8:17 PM, Tomek Janiszewski <jani...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > How about running CI on all reviews. If patch is stale it probably can't > be > > applied, CI will post bad patch and if nobody do any action on that > review > > we can close it. > > > > śr., 29.06.2016, 18:26 użytkownik Joris Van Remoortere <jo...@apache.org > > > > napisał: > > > > > Hello developers, > > > > > > Over the last year we've accumulated a significant review backlog. Over > > the > > > past month it has been floating around ~600 reviews. > > > > > > It would be of great help if you could look through your personal list > > > (Dashboard -> Outgoing -> Open) and identify reviews that are *no > longer > > > relevant* or that you are *not actively working on*. > > > > > > Suggested actions: > > > *No longer relevant: *Please discard them with a message explaining > why. > > > For example a link to the JIRA that was resolved already. > > > *Not actively working on: *Please discard them with a note that you are > > not > > > actively working on this, but to please involve you if someone picks it > > up > > > in the future. A note in the JIRA referencing your discarded review > would > > > be much appreciated here. This way we can easily track previous effort. > > > > > > Remember, discarded doesn't mean deleted. It doesn't even mean this was > > not > > > accepted. It just means we're not currently working on it. This will > help > > > guide reviewers and new contributors to the active set we are all > working > > > on. > > > > > > Ideally as a community we can do this organically. After some time has > > > passed, we will go through and discard ones we think are categorized as > > > above with a note on how to re-open them. > > > > > > Thanks! > > > Joris > > > > > >
