We've had a run of really spotty CI in TripleO. This is making it really hard to land patches if reviewers aren't online. Specifically we seem to get better CI results when the queue is less full (nights and weekends)... often when core reviewers aren't around.
One thing that would help is if core reviews would +2 instead of +1'ing a patches. If you buy the approach of a gerrit review, the code looks good, etc. then go on and +2 it. Don't wait for CI to pass before coming back around to add your final stamp of approval. We all agree that the tripleo-check jobs should be passing (or have passed once collectively) before making any final +A to the patch. The case for a core reviewer to +1 a patch is rare I think. If you have some comments to add but don't want to +2 it then perhaps add those comments with a +0 (or -1 if you think it needs fixed). Sure there are some edge cases where +1's are helpful. But if our goal is to land good code faster I think it would be more helpful to go ahead and +2 and let the CI results fall where they may. Dan __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev