On Oct 15, 2013, at 18:14 , Duncan Thomas 
<duncan.tho...@gmail.com<mailto:duncan.tho...@gmail.com>> wrote:

On 11 October 2013 15:41, Alessandro Pilotti
<apilo...@cloudbasesolutions.com<mailto:apilo...@cloudbasesolutions.com>> wrote:
Current reviews require:

+1 "de facto" driver X mantainer(s)
+2  core reviewer
+2A  core reviewer

While with the proposed scenario we'd get to a way faster route:

+2  driver X mantainer
+2A another driver X mantainer or a core reviewer

This would make a big difference in terms of review time.

Unfortunately I suspect it would also lead to a big difference in
review quality, and not in a positive way. The things that are
important / obvious to somebody who focuses on one driver are totally
different, and often far more limited, than the concerns of somebody
who reviews many drivers and core code changes.

Although the eyes of somebody which comes from a different domain bring usually 
additional points of views and befits, this was not particularly the case for 
what our driver is concerned. As I already wrote, almost all the reviews so far 
have been related to unit tests or minor formal corrections.

I disagree on the "far more limited": driver devs (at least in our case), have 
to work on a wider range of projects beside Nova (e.g.: Neutron, Cinder, 
Ceilometer and outside proper OpenStack OpenVSwitch and Crowbar, to name the 
most relevant cases).





--
Duncan Thomas

_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org<mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Reply via email to