On 6/17/14, 1:56 PM, "Duncan Thomas" <[email protected]> wrote:
>A far more effective way to reduce the load of trivial review issues >on core reviewers is for none-core reviewers to get in there first, >spot the problems and add a -1 - the trivial issues are then hopefully >fixed up before a core reviewer even looks at the patch. > >The fundamental problem with review is that there are more people >submitting than doing regular reviews. If you want the review queue to >shrink, do five reviews for every one you submit. +1 What you give is what you get! > A -1 from a >none-core (followed by a +1 when all the issues are fixed) is far, >far, far more useful in general than a +1 on a new patch. > > > >On 17 June 2014 11:04, Matthew Booth <[email protected]> wrote: >> We all know that review can be a bottleneck for Nova patches.Not only >> that, but a patch lingering in review, no matter how trivial, will >> eventually accrue rebases which sap gate resources, developer time, and >> will to live. >> >> It occurs to me that there are a significant class of patches which >> simply don't require the attention of a core reviewer. Some examples: >> >> * Indentation cleanup/comment fixes >> * Simple code motion >> * File permission changes >> * Trivial fixes which are obviously correct >> >> The advantage of a core reviewer is that they have experience of the >> whole code base, and have proven their ability to make and judge core >> changes. However, some fixes don't require this level of attention, as >> they are self-contained and obvious to any reasonable programmer. >> >> Without knowing anything of the architecture of gerrit, I propose >> something along the lines of a '+1 (trivial)' review flag. If a review >> gained some small number of these, I suggest 2 would be reasonable, it >> would be equivalent to a +2 from a core reviewer. The ability to set >> this flag would be a privilege. However, the bar to gaining this >> privilege would be low, and preferably automatically set, e.g. 5 >> accepted patches. It would be removed for abuse. >> >> Is this practical? Would it help? >> >> Matt >> -- >> Matthew Booth >> Red Hat Engineering, Virtualisation Team >> >> Phone: +442070094448 (UK) >> GPG ID: D33C3490 >> GPG FPR: 3733 612D 2D05 5458 8A8A 1600 3441 EA19 D33C 3490 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OpenStack-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > > >-- >Duncan Thomas > >_______________________________________________ >OpenStack-dev mailing list >[email protected] >http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
