John Garbutt wrote: > [...] > Personally I find a mix of coding and reviewing good to keep a decent > level of empathy and sanity. I don't have time for any coding this > release (only a bit of documenting), and its not something I can > honestly recommend as a best practice. If people don't maintain a good > level of reviews, we do tend to drop those folks from nova-core. > > I know ttx has been pushing for dedicated reviewers. It would be nice > to find folks that can do that, but we just haven't found any of those > people to date.
Hell no! I'd hate dedicated reviewers. I want everyone to be a reviewer and a commit author. It's the only way to keep current on the code and relevant enough to be trusted for the final +2s. The trick is that given how wide and diverse Nova's code is, it's impossible to be a reviewer / commit author / expert in all the Nova things. If you slowly grew with Nova over the past years, you may have a good grasp of most parts. But for newcomers, it's an impossible mountain to climb, and they prefer to go to smaller projects. And as we burn out old people with a giant set of reviews, we fail to replace them with new blood. This is why I advocate dividing code / reviewers / expertise along smaller areas within Nova, so that new people can focus and become a master again. What I'm pushing for is creating Nova subteams with their own core reviewers, which would be experts and trusted to +2 on a defined subset of code. -- Thierry Carrez (ttx) __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
