As a Management Principle, a smaller group tends to act with more personal
accountablility than does a larger one.  One management guru says it thus
"When everyone is responsible <for something>, then no one is."

I'd suggest that even 10 reviewers might be too many.

I would also think that a reviewer needs to be a SME (subject matter
expert); I'm not sure how you'd bring that into the mix, but it could be
important from a quality control perspective.

Not sure that's worth even $0.02, but it's what I have to contribute.  <g>

Paul



Paul Hanchett
-------------------
Infotainment Engineer
MSX on behalf of Jaguar Land Rover
One World Trade Center, 121 Southwest Salmon Street, 11th Floor, Portland,
Oregon, 97204

Email: [email protected]
-------------------

Business Details:
Jaguar Land Rover Limited
Registered Office: Abbey Road, Whitley, Coventry CV3 4LF
Registered in England No: 1672070


On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 1:25 AM, Łukasz Stelmach <[email protected]>wrote:

> It was <2014-01-30 czw 23:53>, when Thiago Macieira wrote:
> > On quinta-feira, 30 de janeiro de 2014 21:54:20, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> >> On Thu, 2014-01-30 at 10:48 -0800, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> >> > Ensuring that everything got reviewed is the responsibility of the
> >> > maintainer. But it's the *interest* of the contributor, so the
> >> > contributor should pay attention to the state of the contribution.
> >> >
> >> > If a contribution goes unreviewed after a while, ping the reviewers.
> >>
> >> That's impractical when the list of reviewers is larger than a handful.
> >> Who should get contacted? Randomly? Chances are high that the ones not
> >> doing any active work on the package will get pinged, annoying them
> >> further and causing additional delays.
> >
> > Just write a new comment saying "ping".
> >
> > Any of the reviewers is capable of approving the change. The question is
> only
> > whether they feel confident in doing so.
> >
> >> What's your take on those packages which currently have more than ten
> >> reviewers?
> >
> > Having that many reviewers is great! That means more people to look at
> > the changes, to find potential issues, offer advice as well as to
> > provide round-the- clock ability to review things. Having too few
> > reviewers (or none) is a bad thing -- for example, for my changes in
> > QtCore, very often no one can review them, which means I need to seek
> > exceptions.
>
> On the other, from a reviewer's perspective, hand having too many
> packages to review is bad.
>
> > The problem we have in Tizen is not that we have too few
> > reviewers. It's that each reviewer says "there are others, they'll
> > review" and no one ends up doing it.
> >
> > I would have preferred that the Cc list for each contribution have no
> > more than 10 people. More than that, we've got the effect I mentioned.
>
> That is exactly the point. And you also need to make sure that each of
> thos 10 people won't get notifications for more than N (IMHO N ~ 3 and I
> can negotiate that) repositories.
>
> I admit I send (almost) all the gerrit messages to bit bucket (manually
> but still) and treat them (their presence in my INBOX) only as a
> reminder to go to Gerrit and take a closer look. Then I also have a
> script that removes me from lists of reviewers for changes of several
> packages I know I can't help with. Only from time to time I take a look
> at random one of such changes at give my comments (most of the time I
> hate commit messages).
>
> As I wrote in December the compromise would be:
>
> - set up lists of *notified* pople for each project separate from the
>   "domain groups",
>
> - allow all members of the "domain groups" to excersise their
>   permissions in all repositories of the domain.
>
> However risky the second point may look, it will help in many simple
> situations where one member of a team (there is currently six in mine)
> is sick go for holiday and the others can take his duties.
>
> --
> Łukasz Stelmach
> Samsung R&D Institute Poland
> Samsung Electronics
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.tizen.org/listinfo/dev
>
>
_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.tizen.org/listinfo/dev

Reply via email to