Thanks for the nomination Clint (and +1s from people who have already

At this stage, I believe we've traditionally[1] asked[2] the potential new
Core Reviewer to commit to 3 reviews per work-day.

I don't feel that that's a commitment I can make at this point. It's not
something I've been able to achieve in the past - I've come close over the
last 30 days, but the 90 day report shows me barely above 2 per day. I
think my current throughput is something I can commit to maintaining, and
I'd like to think that it can grow over time; but I don't think I can
commit to doing anything more than I've already been able to do.

If the rest of the core reviewers think I'm still making a valuable
contribution, I'm more than happy to accept this nomination.

[1] At least for the last 12 months or so, since I first started working on
[2] more accurately, I believe we don't usually nominate a new Core until
they've demonstrated their commitment by having already sustained 3 reviews
per work-day for a few months

On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 6:14 PM, Clint Byrum <> wrote:

> Hello! It has been a while since we expanded our review team. The
> numbers aren't easy to read with recent dips caused by the summit and
> holidays. However, I believe James has demonstrated superb review skills
> and a commitment to the project that shows broad awareness of the
> project.
> Below are the results of a meta-review I did, selecting recent reviews
> by James with comments and a final score. I didn't find any reviews by
> James that I objected to.
> -- Took charge and provided
> valuable feedback. +2
> -- Good -1 asking for better
> commit message and then timely follow-up +1 with positive comments for
> more improvement. +2
> -- Simpler review, +1'd on Dec.
> 19 and no follow-up since. Allowing 2 weeks for holiday vacation, this
> is only really about 7 - 10 working days and acceptable. +2
> -- Very thoughtful -1 review of
> recent change with alternatives to the approach submitted as patches.
> -- Simpler review, +1'd in
> agreement with everyone else. +1
> -- Thoughtful +1 with
> consideration for other reviewers. +2
> -- Thorough spec review with
> grammar pedantry noted as something that would not prevent a positive
> review score. +2
> All current tripleo-core members are invited to vote at this time. Thank
> you!
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe:
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)

Reply via email to