Week 1: rev 11823 till 11875 there were 7 unreviewed landings - 13%. Landings where a review would have been a net win 1. Landings where review would have been the best place to improve things: 0
Week 2: (*) There are two landings of mine not reviewed yet. But they are tiny. rev 11876 to 11926 with 8 unreviewed landings - 16%. Landings where a review would have been a net win 0. Landings where review would have been the best place to improve things: 0 Week 3: (*) There is one landings of mine not reviewed yet. But its tiny. rev 11927 to 11956 with 7 unreviewed landings - 23%. Landings where a review would have been a net win 1. Landings where review would have been the best place to improve things: 0 or 1 The tracking table is at https://dev.launchpad.net/PolicyAndProcess/OptionalReviews. So, this concludes the (slightly extended) trial phase of this experiment: every self reviewed landing has (or will be when jml reviews my 3 self reviewed landings) reviewed. I think the experiment is going well - there's only been 2 out of 22 landings where a review would have been worth it (IMNSHO) - so we're making good tradeoff calls over 90% of the time. >From here on in, each month we'll divide up and allocate self reviewed landings to reviewers, one review per reviewer, to keep tabs on this. Remember when doing this that the question is 'would a review have been worth it', not 'would a review have made things better'. Francis will organise the first of these on the 1st of November (which only needs to capture things from 11960 on), and I'll organise the second on the 3rd of January. Please remember to create a merge proposal when self reviewing, so that this process can use that. Thanks, Rob _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
