On Dec 4, 2014, at 4:05 PM, Michael Still mi...@stillhq.com wrote:
One of the things that happens over time is that some of our core
reviewers move on to other projects. This is a normal and healthy
thing, especially as nova continues to spin out projects into other
parts of OpenStack.
Le 07/12/2014 23:27, Dan Smith a écrit :
The argument boils down to there is a communications cost to adding
someone to core, and therefore there is a maximum size before the
communications burden becomes to great.
I'm definitely of the mindset that the core team is something that has a
@lists.openstack.org
Date: Monday, December 8, 2014 at 10:15 AM
To: OpenStack List
openstack-dev@lists.openstack.orgmailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Spring cleaning nova-core
Le 07/12/2014 23:27, Dan Smith a écrit :
The argument boils down to there is a communications
On Sat, Dec 06, 2014 at 07:56:21AM +1100, Michael Still wrote:
I used Russell's 60 day stats in making this decision. I can't find a
documented historical precedent on what period the stats should be
generated over, however 60 days seems entirely reasonable to me.
2014-12-05 15:41:11.212927
On Sun, Dec 07, 2014 at 08:19:54PM +1100, Michael Still wrote:
On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 7:03 PM, Gary Kotton gkot...@vmware.com wrote:
On 12/6/14, 7:42 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
[snip]
-1 on pixelbeat, since he's been active in reviews on
various things AFAICT in the last
On 12/07/2014 12:02 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 12/07/2014 04:19 AM, Michael Still wrote:
On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 7:03 PM, Gary Kotton gkot...@vmware.com wrote:
On 12/6/14, 7:42 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
[snip]
-1 on pixelbeat, since he's been active in reviews on
various things
I agree -1 for Padraig
On 12/6/14, 7:42 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/04/2014 04:05 PM, Michael Still wrote:
One of the things that happens over time is that some of our core
reviewers move on to other projects. This is a normal and healthy
thing, especially as nova continues
On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 7:03 PM, Gary Kotton gkot...@vmware.com wrote:
On 12/6/14, 7:42 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
[snip]
-1 on pixelbeat, since he's been active in reviews on
various things AFAICT in the last 60-90 days and seems to be still a
considerate reviewer in various areas.
Please see http://stackalytics.com/report/contribution/nova-group/90. If
we are following the average of 2 reviews per day then proposed list
should be updated.
On 12/7/14, 11:19 AM, Michael Still mi...@stillhq.com wrote:
On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 7:03 PM, Gary Kotton gkot...@vmware.com wrote:
On
I'm going to be honest and say I'm confused here.
We've always said we expect cores to maintain an average of two
reviews per day. That's not new, nor a rule created by me. Padraig is
a great guy, but has been working on other things -- he's done 60
reviews in the last 60 days -- which is
On 12/07/2014 04:19 AM, Michael Still wrote:
On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 7:03 PM, Gary Kotton gkot...@vmware.com wrote:
On 12/6/14, 7:42 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
[snip]
-1 on pixelbeat, since he's been active in reviews on
various things AFAICT in the last 60-90 days and seems to
On 12/07/2014 06:02 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 12/07/2014 04:19 AM, Michael Still wrote:
On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 7:03 PM, Gary Kotton gkot...@vmware.com wrote:
On 12/6/14, 7:42 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
[snip]
-1 on pixelbeat, since he's been active in reviews on
various things
On 12/7/14, 6:41 PM, Dan Smith d...@danplanet.com wrote:
I'm going to be honest and say I'm confused here.
We've always said we expect cores to maintain an average of two
reviews per day. That's not new, nor a rule created by me. Padraig is
a great guy, but has been working on other
On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 4:02 AM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/07/2014 04:19 AM, Michael Still wrote:
[snip]
We've always said we expect cores to maintain an average of two
reviews per day. That's not new, nor a rule created by me. Padraig is
a great guy, but has been working on
On Mon, Dec 08, 2014, Michael Still mi...@stillhq.com wrote:
There are other things happening behind the scenes as well -- we have
a veto process for current cores when we propose a new core. It has
been made clear to me that several current core members believe we
have reached the maximum
On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 8:33 AM, Johannes Erdfelt johan...@erdfelt.com wrote:
On Mon, Dec 08, 2014, Michael Still mi...@stillhq.com wrote:
There are other things happening behind the scenes as well -- we have
a veto process for current cores when we propose a new core. It has
been made clear to
On 12/04/2014 04:05 PM, Michael Still wrote:
One of the things that happens over time is that some of our core
reviewers move on to other projects. This is a normal and healthy
thing, especially as nova continues to spin out projects into other
parts of OpenStack.
However, it is important that
On Fri, Dec 05, 2014 at 11:05:28AM +1100, Michael Still wrote:
One of the things that happens over time is that some of our core
reviewers move on to other projects. This is a normal and healthy
thing, especially as nova continues to spin out projects into other
parts of OpenStack.
However,
On 12/5/2014 7:41 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Fri, Dec 05, 2014 at 11:05:28AM +1100, Michael Still wrote:
One of the things that happens over time is that some of our core
reviewers move on to other projects. This is a normal and healthy
thing, especially as nova continues to spin out
On 12/05/2014 01:05 AM, Michael Still wrote:
One of the things that happens over time is that some of our core
reviewers move on to other projects. This is a normal and healthy
thing, especially as nova continues to spin out projects into other
parts of OpenStack.
However, it is important
On Fri, Dec 05, 2014 at 01:41:59PM +, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Fri, Dec 05, 2014 at 11:05:28AM +1100, Michael Still wrote:
One of the things that happens over time is that some of our core
reviewers move on to other projects. This is a normal and healthy
thing, especially as nova
On Fri, Dec 05, 2014 at 07:44:24AM -0600, Matt Riedemann wrote:
On 12/5/2014 7:41 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Fri, Dec 05, 2014 at 11:05:28AM +1100, Michael Still wrote:
One of the things that happens over time is that some of our core
reviewers move on to other projects. This is a
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:56 AM, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com
wrote:
FWIW, markmc is already off the list [1].
Ah yes, must be that russell needs to update the config file for his script
to stop marking markmc as core.
Regards,
Daniel
--
Anyone can do it:
On 12/05/2014 08:41 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Fri, Dec 05, 2014 at 11:05:28AM +1100, Michael Still wrote:
One of the things that happens over time is that some of our core
reviewers move on to other projects. This is a normal and healthy
thing, especially as nova continues to spin out
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
On 12/05/2014 08:41 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Fri, Dec 05, 2014 at 11:05:28AM +1100, Michael Still wrote:
One of the things that happens over time is that some of our core
reviewers move on to other projects.
On 12/05/2014 11:23 AM, Joe Gordon wrote:
As you are more then aware of, our policy for removing people from core
is to leave that up the the PTL (I believe you wrote that) [0]. And I
don't think numbers alone are a good metric for sorting out who to
remove. That being said no matter what
On Dec 5, 2014 11:39 AM, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
On 12/05/2014 11:23 AM, Joe Gordon wrote:
As you are more then aware of, our policy for removing people from core
is to leave that up the the PTL (I believe you wrote that) [0]. And I
don't think numbers alone are a good
27 matches
Mail list logo
