On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 1:49 AM, Michael Adam <ob...@samba.org> wrote:

> On 2016-10-05 at 09:45 -0400, Ira Cooper wrote:
> > "Feedback-given-by: <nosy.person@silly.place>"
>

Niels/Nigel,
       Is this easier to do?


>
> I like that one - thanks! :-)
>
> Michael
>
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > > On 2016-09-30 at 17:52 +0200, Niels de Vos wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 08:50:12PM +0530, Ravishankar N wrote:
> > > > > On 09/30/2016 06:38 PM, Niels de Vos wrote:
> > > > > > On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 07:11:51AM +0530, Pranith Kumar Karampuri
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > ...
> > > > > > Maybe we can add an additional tag that mentions all the people
> that
> > > > > > did do reviews of older versions of the patch. Not sure what the
> tag
> > > > > > would be, maybe just CC?
> > > > > It depends on what tags would be processed to obtain statistics on
> review
> > > > > contributions.
> > > >
> > > > Real statistics would come from Gerrit, not from the 'git log'
> output.
> > > > We do have a ./extras/who-wrote-glusterfs/ in the sources, but that
> is
> > > > only to get an idea about the changes that were made and should not
> be
> > > > used for serious statistics.
> > > >
> > > > It is possible to feed the Gerrit comment-stream into things like
> > > > Elasticsearch and get an accurate impression how many reviews people
> do
> > > > (and much more). I hope we can get some contribution diagrams from
> > > > someting like this at one point.
> > > >
> > > > Would some kind of Gave-feedback tag for people that left a comment
> on
> > > > earlier versions of the patch be appreciated by others? It will show
> in
> > > > the 'git log' who was involved in some way or form.
> > >
> > > I think this would be fair.
> > >
> > > Reviewed-by tags should imho be reserved for the final
> > > incarnation of the patch. Those mean that the person named
> > > in the tag has aproved this version of the patch for getting
> > > into the official tree. A previous version of the patch can
> > > have been entirely different, so a reviewed-by for that
> > > previous version may not actually apply to the new version at all
> > > and hence create a false impression!
> > >
> > > It is also difficult to track all activities by tags,
> > > and anyone who wants to measure performance and contributions
> > > only by looking at git commit tags will not be doing several
> > > people justice. We could add 'discussed-with' or 'designed-by'
> > > tags, etc ... ;-)
> > >
> > > On a serious note, in Samba we use 'Pair-programmed-with' tags,
> > > because we do pair-programming a lot, but only one person can
> > > be an author of a git commit ...
> > >
> > > The 'Gave-feedback' tag I do like. even though it does
> > > not quite match with the foobar-by pattern of other tags.
> > >
> > > Michael
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Gluster-devel mailing list
> > > gluster-de...@gluster.org
> > > http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>
> _______________________________________________
> maintainers mailing list
> maintainers@gluster.org
> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
>
>


-- 
Pranith
_______________________________________________
maintainers mailing list
maintainers@gluster.org
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers

Reply via email to