Mathieu:

The peer review proposal was NOT about removing core reviewers, that
is very clear in the proposal. The peer review proposal was about
deciding as a team what it means to be a core reviewer, and ensuring
core reviewers are doing that. I still plan to do try out the peer
review process in the coming weeks. But even with that process,
reviews are the main thing a core reviewer must be doing. If you're
not doing reviews upstream, especially for long stretches, you're not
really a core reviewer.

Thanks,
Kyle

On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 4:41 AM, Mathieu Rohon <mathieu.ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> It seems that a process with a survey for neutron core
> election/removal was about to take place [1]. Has it been applied for
> this proposal?
> This proposal has been hardly discussed during neutron meetings
> [2][3]. Many cores agree that the number of reviews shouldn't be the
> only metrics. And this statement is reflected in the Survey Questions.
> So I'm surprised to see such a proposal based on stackalitics figures.
>
> [1]https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/neutron-peer-review
> [2]http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking/2014/networking.2014-10-13-21.02.log.html
> [3]http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking/2014/networking.2014-10-21-14.00.log.html
>
> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 9:44 AM, Oleg Bondarev <obonda...@mirantis.com> wrote:
>> +1! Congrats, Henry and Kevin!
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 6:59 PM, Kyle Mestery <mest...@mestery.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Now that we're in the thick of working hard on Kilo deliverables, I'd
>>> like to make some changes to the neutron core team. Reviews are the
>>> most important part of being a core reviewer, so we need to ensure
>>> cores are doing reviews. The stats for the 180 day period [1] indicate
>>> some changes are needed for cores who are no longer reviewing.
>>>
>>> First of all, I'm proposing we remove Bob Kukura and Nachi Ueno from
>>> neutron-core. Bob and Nachi have been core members for a while now.
>>> They have contributed to Neutron over the years in reviews, code and
>>> leading sub-teams. I'd like to thank them for all that they have done
>>> over the years. I'd also like to propose that should they start
>>> reviewing more going forward the core team looks to fast track them
>>> back into neutron-core. But for now, their review stats place them
>>> below the rest of the team for 180 days.
>>>
>>> As part of the changes, I'd also like to propose two new members to
>>> neutron-core: Henry Gessau and Kevin Benton. Both Henry and Kevin have
>>> been very active in reviews, meetings, and code for a while now. Henry
>>> lead the DB team which fixed Neutron DB migrations during Juno. Kevin
>>> has been actively working across all of Neutron, he's done some great
>>> work on security fixes and stability fixes in particular. Their
>>> comments in reviews are insightful and they have helped to onboard new
>>> reviewers and taken the time to work with people on their patches.
>>>
>>> Existing neutron cores, please vote +1/-1 for the addition of Henry
>>> and Kevin to the core team.
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>> Kyle
>>>
>>> [1] http://stackalytics.com/report/contribution/neutron-group/180
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>>> 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
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> 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