"Sullivan, Jon Paul" <jonpaul.sulli...@hp.com> writes:

> This is not solely about finding reviews.  It is about pruning stale
> reviews.  I think the auto-abandon code was excellent at doing this,
> but alas, it is no more.

What's the purpose of pruning stale reviews?  I've read the IRC log of
the meeting you mentioned.  It's becoming apparent to me that this is
about making some numbers that reviewstats produces look good.

I am rather disappointed in that.

If reviewstats is not measuring what you want it to measure (eg, how
well you keep up with incoming reviews) then you should change how it
measures it.  If you want the number of open reviews to be low, then
change the definition of open reviews to what you think it should be --
don't create automated processes to WIP changes just to get your numbers

The reason that we made it so that any core team member could WIP or
abandon a change was so that you could make a judgement call and say
"this change needs more work" or "this change is defunct".  You might
even use a tool to help you find those reviews and make those judgement
calls.  But no automated tool can make those decisions.  Luckily, it
does not need to.

If you want to organize your review queue, use a tool like


If you want to change how stats are generated, patch reviewstats.


OpenStack-dev mailing list

Reply via email to