Re: [openstack-dev] doubling our core review bandwidth

2014-09-08 Thread Zane Bitter
On 07/09/14 23:43, Morgan Fainberg wrote: ## avoiding collaboration between bad actors > >The two core requirement means that it takes three people (proposer + >2 core) to collaborate on landing something inappropriate (whether its >half baked, a misfeature, whatever). Thats only 50% harder than

Re: [openstack-dev] doubling our core review bandwidth

2014-09-08 Thread Kevin L. Mitchell
> tl;dr I think we should drop our 'needs 2x+2 to land' rule and instead > use 'needs 1x+2'. We can ease up a large chunk of pressure on our > review bottleneck, with the only significant negative being that core > reviewers may see less of the code going into the system - but they > can always rea

Re: [openstack-dev] doubling our core review bandwidth

2014-09-08 Thread Sean Dague
On 09/08/2014 11:07 AM, Alexis Lee wrote: > Sean Dague said on Mon, Sep 08, 2014 at 09:22:56AM -0400: >>> On 09/08/2014 05:17 AM, Steven Hardy wrote: I think this may be a sensible move, but only if it's used primarily to land the less complex/risky patches more quickly. >> >> 2 +2 has be

Re: [openstack-dev] doubling our core review bandwidth

2014-09-08 Thread Alexis Lee
Sean Dague said on Mon, Sep 08, 2014 at 09:22:56AM -0400: > > On 09/08/2014 05:17 AM, Steven Hardy wrote: > >> I think this may be a sensible move, but only if it's used primarily to > >> land the less complex/risky patches more quickly. > > 2 +2 has been part of OpenStack culture for a long time,

Re: [openstack-dev] doubling our core review bandwidth

2014-09-08 Thread Flavio Percoco
On 09/08/2014 02:52 PM, Russell Bryant wrote: > On 09/08/2014 05:17 AM, Steven Hardy wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 08, 2014 at 03:14:24PM +1200, Robert Collins wrote: >>> I hope the subject got your attention :). >>> >>> This might be a side effect of my having too many cosmic rays, but its >>> been percol

Re: [openstack-dev] doubling our core review bandwidth

2014-09-08 Thread Sean Dague
On 09/08/2014 08:52 AM, Russell Bryant wrote: > On 09/08/2014 05:17 AM, Steven Hardy wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 08, 2014 at 03:14:24PM +1200, Robert Collins wrote: >>> I hope the subject got your attention :). >>> >>> This might be a side effect of my having too many cosmic rays, but its >>> been percol

Re: [openstack-dev] doubling our core review bandwidth

2014-09-08 Thread Russell Bryant
On 09/08/2014 05:17 AM, Steven Hardy wrote: > On Mon, Sep 08, 2014 at 03:14:24PM +1200, Robert Collins wrote: >> I hope the subject got your attention :). >> >> This might be a side effect of my having too many cosmic rays, but its >> been percolating for a bit. >> >> tl;dr I think we should drop o

Re: [openstack-dev] doubling our core review bandwidth

2014-09-08 Thread Steven Hardy
On Mon, Sep 08, 2014 at 03:14:24PM +1200, Robert Collins wrote: > I hope the subject got your attention :). > > This might be a side effect of my having too many cosmic rays, but its > been percolating for a bit. > > tl;dr I think we should drop our 'needs 2x+2 to land' rule and instead > use 'ne

Re: [openstack-dev] doubling our core review bandwidth

2014-09-07 Thread Morgan Fainberg
Responses in-line. -Original Message- From: Robert Collins Reply: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Date: September 7, 2014 at 20:16:32 To: OpenStack Development Mailing List > Subject:  [openstack-dev] doubling our core review bandwidth > I hope the subjec

Re: [openstack-dev] doubling our core review bandwidth

2014-09-07 Thread Angus Salkeld
On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Robert Collins wrote: > I hope the subject got your attention :). > > This might be a side effect of my having too many cosmic rays, but its > been percolating for a bit. > > tl;dr I think we should drop our 'needs 2x+2 to land' rule and instead > use 'needs 1x+2'.