-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On 29/07/14 12:15, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > Looking at the current review backlog I think that we have to > seriously question whether our stable branch review process in > Nova is working to an acceptable level > > On Havana > > - 43 patches pending > - 19 patches with a single +2 > - 1 patch with a -1 > - 0 patches wit a -2 > - Stalest waiting 111 days since most recent patch upload > - Oldest waiting 250 days since first patch upload > - 26 patches waiting more than 1 month since most recent upload > - 40 patches waiting more than 1 month since first upload > > On Icehouse: > > - 45 patches pending > - 17 patches with a single +2 > - 4 patches with a -1 > - 1 patch with a -2 > - Stalest waiting 84 days since most recent patch upload > - Oldest waiting 88 days since first patch upload > - 10 patches waiting more than 1 month since most recent upload > - 29 patches waiting more than 1 month since first upload > > I think those stats paint a pretty poor picture of our stable branch > review process, particularly Havana. > > It should not take us 250 days for our review team to figure out whether > a patch is suitable material for a stable branch, nor should we have > nearly all the patches waiting more than 1 month in Havana. > > These branches are not getting sufficient reviewer attention and we need > to take steps to fix that. > > If I had to set a benchmark, assuming CI passes, I'd expect us to either > approve or reject submissions for stable within a 2 week window in the > common case, 1 month at the worst case.
Totally agreed. > > If we are trying to throttle down the rate of change in Havana, that > totally makes sense, but we should be more active at rejecting patches > if that is our current goal, not let them hang around in limbo for > many months. Tip: to be notified in time about new backport requests, you may add those branches you're interested in to watched, in Gerrit, go to Settings -> Watched Projects, and add whatever you like. Then you'll receive emails for each backport request. > > I'm actually unclear on who even has permission to approve patches > on stable branches ? Despite being in Nova core I don't have any perm > to approve patches on stable. I think it is pretty odd that we've got a > system where the supposed experts of the Nova team can't approve patches > for stable. I get that we've probably got people on stable team who are > not in core, but IMHO we should have the stable team comprising a superset > of core, not a subset. AFAIK stable team consists of project PTLs + people interested in stable branches specifically (that got added to the team after their request). Anyone can start reviewing the patches and ask to be added to the team. I also think it's weird that project cores don't have +2 for stable branches of their projects. They do not require global +2 for all stable branches though. > > Regards, > Daniel > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJT13h/AAoJEC5aWaUY1u57Kn4H+gMhIA2omnwIfFqibrMRnTex DkZNtgDNvfPIBxkhmkj0anREsnglgrwjufPZYF0MmJcxSvCDLJnWoDJ+iOxir9sg FiW0GVcSB89TNjKNbRfeFcuP6J6Dw6eNRvYnwf2OoypcyVBN+yElHJG+8/bzZ7FV lZFGdTK3X777ik2DtFdjkpbrGxxOG+BC/ZWtiKWiI5HPnnl0ZZPHuI44cclDCvGu bcR5yjFkMYa/hXnzbM+vYcP/kf7iBguEdfn792egrZE1BajSknbT6HYXkJ4C765R qmq487hlJ60KdkSS8oEWzLcRrNIKir3qyMTqjZ73tUIuKdATcqiylC53a0ZuJKM= =B7hS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev