Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Proposal to add Jon Paul Sullivan and Alexis Lee to core review team
Robert Collins said on Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 09:13:52AM +1200: Alexis, Jon - core status means a commitment to three reviews a work day (on average), keeping track of changing policies and our various specs and initiatives, and obviously being excellent to us all :). Hello, Thank you all for this great opportunity, especially Clint for taking the time to do the metareview as Rob mentioned. I'd like very much to join the team and hope I can be of service. Looking forward to meeting you all face to face soon (probably Paris), first round's on me. Alexis -- Nova Engineer, HP Cloud. AKA lealexis, lxsli. ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Proposal to add Jon Paul Sullivan and Alexis Lee to core review team
Hi Rob, Being added as a core review would be great, thank you all for the votes of confidence, and I'll do my best to keep tripleo making great progress. Thanks, Jon-Paul Sullivan ☺ Cloud Services - @hpcloud Postal Address: Hewlett-Packard Galway Limited, Ballybrit Business Park, Galway. Registered Office: Hewlett-Packard Galway Limited, 63-74 Sir John Rogerson's Quay, Dublin 2. Registered Number: 361933 The contents of this message and any attachments to it are confidential and may be legally privileged. If you have received this message in error you should delete it from your system immediately and advise the sender. To any recipient of this message within HP, unless otherwise stated, you should consider this message and attachments as HP CONFIDENTIAL. -Original Message- From: Robert Collins [mailto:robe...@robertcollins.net] Sent: 15 July 2014 22:14 To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Cc: Lee, Alexis; Sullivan, Jon Paul Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Proposal to add Jon Paul Sullivan and Alexis Lee to core review team Clint, thanks heaps for making the time to do a meta-review. With the clear support of the other cores, I'm really happy to be able to invite Alexis and JP to core status. Alexis, Jon - core status means a commitment to three reviews a work day (on average), keeping track of changing policies and our various specs and initiatives, and obviously being excellent to us all :). You don't have to take up the commitment if you don't want to - not everyone has the time to keep up to date with everything going on etc. Let me know your decision and I'll add you to the team :). -Ro On 10 July 2014 03:52, Clint Byrum cl...@fewbar.com wrote: Hello! I've been looking at the statistics, and doing a bit of review of the reviewers, and I think we have an opportunity to expand the core reviewer team in TripleO. We absolutely need the help, and I think these two individuals are well positioned to do that. I would like to draw your attention to this page: http://russellbryant.net/openstack-stats/tripleo-reviewers-90.txt Specifically these two lines: +---+---+- ---+ | Reviewer | Reviews -2 -1 +1 +2 +A+/- % | Disagreements* | +---+---+- ---+ | jonpaul-sullivan | 1880 43 145 0 077.1% | 28 ( 14.9%) | | lxsli | 1860 23 163 0 087.6% | 27 ( 14.5%) | Note that they are right at the level we expect, 3 per work day. And I've looked through their reviews and code contributions: it is clear that they understand what we're trying to do in TripleO, and how it all works. I am a little dismayed at the slightly high disagreement rate, but looking through the disagreements, most of them were jp and lxsli being more demanding of submitters, so I am less dismayed. So, I propose that we add jonpaul-sullivan and lxsli to the TripleO core reviewer team. ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev -- Robert Collins rbtcoll...@hp.com Distinguished Technologist HP Converged Cloud ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Proposal to add Jon Paul Sullivan and Alexis Lee to core review team
On 14/07/14 19:11, Ben Nemec wrote: +1. In my experience they've both demonstrated that they know what they're doing. I think the bikeshedding/grammar nits on specs is kind of a separate issue that will need to be worked out in general. It's still very early on in this new *-specs repo world, and I think everyone's still trying to figure out where to draw the line on how much grammar/spelling nit-picking is appropriate. +1 from me too for both. I agree with the gist of Tomas comments but I really agree with Ben's comments above ... trying to convey 'rules' about what constitutes bikeshedding is basically impossible given that there will be varying opinions. In any case, if it really is just e.g. a 'rephrase' or a small/inconsequential commit message nit/typo and as echoed by others here, you can just make a suggestion. A +1 (and not a -1 or even a +2 for example) should be sufficient to make that suggestion. Then its up to others to vote either way, and you haven't held up progress with a -1, just my 2c, thanks, marios -Ben On 07/09/2014 10:52 AM, Clint Byrum wrote: Hello! I've been looking at the statistics, and doing a bit of review of the reviewers, and I think we have an opportunity to expand the core reviewer team in TripleO. We absolutely need the help, and I think these two individuals are well positioned to do that. I would like to draw your attention to this page: http://russellbryant.net/openstack-stats/tripleo-reviewers-90.txt Specifically these two lines: +---+---++ | Reviewer | Reviews -2 -1 +1 +2 +A+/- % | Disagreements* | +---+---++ | jonpaul-sullivan | 1880 43 145 0 077.1% | 28 ( 14.9%) | | lxsli | 1860 23 163 0 087.6% | 27 ( 14.5%) | Note that they are right at the level we expect, 3 per work day. And I've looked through their reviews and code contributions: it is clear that they understand what we're trying to do in TripleO, and how it all works. I am a little dismayed at the slightly high disagreement rate, but looking through the disagreements, most of them were jp and lxsli being more demanding of submitters, so I am less dismayed. So, I propose that we add jonpaul-sullivan and lxsli to the TripleO core reviewer team. ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Proposal to add Jon Paul Sullivan and Alexis Lee to core review team
On 09/07/14 16:52, Clint Byrum wrote: Hello! I've been looking at the statistics, and doing a bit of review of the reviewers, and I think we have an opportunity to expand the core reviewer team in TripleO. We absolutely need the help, and I think these two individuals are well positioned to do that. I would like to draw your attention to this page: http://russellbryant.net/openstack-stats/tripleo-reviewers-90.txt Specifically these two lines: +---+---++ | Reviewer | Reviews -2 -1 +1 +2 +A+/- % | Disagreements* | +---+---++ | jonpaul-sullivan | 1880 43 145 0 077.1% | 28 ( 14.9%) | | lxsli | 1860 23 163 0 087.6% | 27 ( 14.5%) | Note that they are right at the level we expect, 3 per work day. And I've looked through their reviews and code contributions: it is clear that they understand what we're trying to do in TripleO, and how it all works. I am a little dismayed at the slightly high disagreement rate, but looking through the disagreements, most of them were jp and lxsli being more demanding of submitters, so I am less dismayed. So, I propose that we add jonpaul-sullivan and lxsli to the TripleO core reviewer team. +1 to both ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Proposal to add Jon Paul Sullivan and Alexis Lee to core review team
Clint, thanks heaps for making the time to do a meta-review. With the clear support of the other cores, I'm really happy to be able to invite Alexis and JP to core status. Alexis, Jon - core status means a commitment to three reviews a work day (on average), keeping track of changing policies and our various specs and initiatives, and obviously being excellent to us all :). You don't have to take up the commitment if you don't want to - not everyone has the time to keep up to date with everything going on etc. Let me know your decision and I'll add you to the team :). -Ro On 10 July 2014 03:52, Clint Byrum cl...@fewbar.com wrote: Hello! I've been looking at the statistics, and doing a bit of review of the reviewers, and I think we have an opportunity to expand the core reviewer team in TripleO. We absolutely need the help, and I think these two individuals are well positioned to do that. I would like to draw your attention to this page: http://russellbryant.net/openstack-stats/tripleo-reviewers-90.txt Specifically these two lines: +---+---++ | Reviewer | Reviews -2 -1 +1 +2 +A+/- % | Disagreements* | +---+---++ | jonpaul-sullivan | 1880 43 145 0 077.1% | 28 ( 14.9%) | | lxsli | 1860 23 163 0 087.6% | 27 ( 14.5%) | Note that they are right at the level we expect, 3 per work day. And I've looked through their reviews and code contributions: it is clear that they understand what we're trying to do in TripleO, and how it all works. I am a little dismayed at the slightly high disagreement rate, but looking through the disagreements, most of them were jp and lxsli being more demanding of submitters, so I am less dismayed. So, I propose that we add jonpaul-sullivan and lxsli to the TripleO core reviewer team. ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev -- Robert Collins rbtcoll...@hp.com Distinguished Technologist HP Converged Cloud ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Proposal to add Jon Paul Sullivan and Alexis Lee to core review team
+1. In my experience they've both demonstrated that they know what they're doing. I think the bikeshedding/grammar nits on specs is kind of a separate issue that will need to be worked out in general. It's still very early on in this new *-specs repo world, and I think everyone's still trying to figure out where to draw the line on how much grammar/spelling nit-picking is appropriate. -Ben On 07/09/2014 10:52 AM, Clint Byrum wrote: Hello! I've been looking at the statistics, and doing a bit of review of the reviewers, and I think we have an opportunity to expand the core reviewer team in TripleO. We absolutely need the help, and I think these two individuals are well positioned to do that. I would like to draw your attention to this page: http://russellbryant.net/openstack-stats/tripleo-reviewers-90.txt Specifically these two lines: +---+---++ | Reviewer | Reviews -2 -1 +1 +2 +A+/- % | Disagreements* | +---+---++ | jonpaul-sullivan | 1880 43 145 0 077.1% | 28 ( 14.9%) | | lxsli | 1860 23 163 0 087.6% | 27 ( 14.5%) | Note that they are right at the level we expect, 3 per work day. And I've looked through their reviews and code contributions: it is clear that they understand what we're trying to do in TripleO, and how it all works. I am a little dismayed at the slightly high disagreement rate, but looking through the disagreements, most of them were jp and lxsli being more demanding of submitters, so I am less dismayed. So, I propose that we add jonpaul-sullivan and lxsli to the TripleO core reviewer team. ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Proposal to add Jon Paul Sullivan and Alexis Lee to core review team
On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 11:52 AM, Clint Byrum cl...@fewbar.com wrote: So, I propose that we add jonpaul-sullivan and lxsli to the TripleO core reviewer team. I'm +1 to adding both as core reviewers, I've found their reviews to be well reasoned and consistent. -- -- James Slagle -- ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Proposal to add Jon Paul Sullivan and Alexis Lee to core review team
+1 from me. Matt -Original Message- From: Clint Byrum [mailto:cl...@fewbar.com] Sent: 09 July 2014 16:52 To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Proposal to add Jon Paul Sullivan and Alexis Lee to core review team Hello! I've been looking at the statistics, and doing a bit of review of the reviewers, and I think we have an opportunity to expand the core reviewer team in TripleO. We absolutely need the help, and I think these two individuals are well positioned to do that. I would like to draw your attention to this page: http://russellbryant.net/openstack-stats/tripleo-reviewers-90.txt Specifically these two lines: +---+---++ | Reviewer | Reviews -2 -1 +1 +2 +A+/- % | Disagreements* | +---+---++ | jonpaul-sullivan | 1880 43 145 0 077.1% | 28 ( 14.9%) | | lxsli | 1860 23 163 0 087.6% | 27 ( 14.5%) | Note that they are right at the level we expect, 3 per work day. And I've looked through their reviews and code contributions: it is clear that they understand what we're trying to do in TripleO, and how it all works. I am a little dismayed at the slightly high disagreement rate, but looking through the disagreements, most of them were jp and lxsli being more demanding of submitters, so I am less dismayed. So, I propose that we add jonpaul-sullivan and lxsli to the TripleO core reviewer team. ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Proposal to add Jon Paul Sullivan and Alexis Lee to core review team
Hi +1 Cheers, -- Chris Jones On 9 Jul 2014, at 16:52, Clint Byrum cl...@fewbar.com wrote: Hello! I've been looking at the statistics, and doing a bit of review of the reviewers, and I think we have an opportunity to expand the core reviewer team in TripleO. We absolutely need the help, and I think these two individuals are well positioned to do that. I would like to draw your attention to this page: http://russellbryant.net/openstack-stats/tripleo-reviewers-90.txt Specifically these two lines: +---+---++ | Reviewer | Reviews -2 -1 +1 +2 +A+/- % | Disagreements* | +---+---++ | jonpaul-sullivan | 1880 43 145 0 077.1% | 28 ( 14.9%) | | lxsli | 1860 23 163 0 087.6% | 27 ( 14.5%) | Note that they are right at the level we expect, 3 per work day. And I've looked through their reviews and code contributions: it is clear that they understand what we're trying to do in TripleO, and how it all works. I am a little dismayed at the slightly high disagreement rate, but looking through the disagreements, most of them were jp and lxsli being more demanding of submitters, so I am less dismayed. So, I propose that we add jonpaul-sullivan and lxsli to the TripleO core reviewer team. ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Proposal to add Jon Paul Sullivan and Alexis Lee to core review team
On 9.7.2014 17:52, Clint Byrum wrote: So, I propose that we add jonpaul-sullivan and lxsli to the TripleO core reviewer team. +1 Jirka ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Proposal to add Jon Paul Sullivan and Alexis Lee to core review team
On Wed, 9 Jul 2014, Clint Byrum wrote: So, I propose that we add jonpaul-sullivan and lxsli to the TripleO core reviewer team. Obviously I should declare an interest, but I think this'd be good. +1 jan -- Just because I have nothing to hide doesn't mean I have nothing to fear. ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Proposal to add Jon Paul Sullivan and Alexis Lee to core review team
On 09/07/14 17:52, Clint Byrum wrote: Hello! I've been looking at the statistics, and doing a bit of review of the reviewers, and I think we have an opportunity to expand the core reviewer team in TripleO. We absolutely need the help, and I think these two individuals are well positioned to do that. I would like to draw your attention to this page: http://russellbryant.net/openstack-stats/tripleo-reviewers-90.txt Specifically these two lines: +---+---++ | Reviewer | Reviews -2 -1 +1 +2 +A+/- % | Disagreements* | +---+---++ | jonpaul-sullivan | 1880 43 145 0 077.1% | 28 ( 14.9%) | | lxsli | 1860 23 163 0 087.6% | 27 ( 14.5%) | Note that they are right at the level we expect, 3 per work day. And I've looked through their reviews and code contributions: it is clear that they understand what we're trying to do in TripleO, and how it all works. I am a little dismayed at the slightly high disagreement rate, but looking through the disagreements, most of them were jp and lxsli being more demanding of submitters, so I am less dismayed. So, I propose that we add jonpaul-sullivan and lxsli to the TripleO core reviewer team. +1 for both. However, some of the reviews show what I think is a worrying trend in TripleO core. Specifically, nitpicking and tendency to bikeshed. I am absolutely in favour of keeping a clear and unified coding style -- which may require seemingly pointless comments around whitespace, using more widespread coding idioms or requiring an explanation to a non-obvious bit of code. Nothing against people pointing that out. On the other hand, there is a fine line between being demanding of submitters and slowing people down. I think asking to change the tone of a sentence (will vs. should), requiring to replace semver (an abbreviation used in the specification itself) with the full wording, or to splitting a sentence into two, add little overall benefit and are not something we ought to bother with. I've seen this in the code too, but it seems much more prevalent in the specs and docs. Every comment like this puts unnecessary burden on the submitter, the reviewers and the CI and can delay good changes from being merged by days or even weeks. I know I've been guilty of this too. Can we all agree (the new as well as the old cores) to read the bikeshedding essay again and keep it in mind when doing reviews? http://bikeshed.com/ ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Proposal to add Jon Paul Sullivan and Alexis Lee to core review team
Tomas Sedovic said on Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 02:26:06PM +0200: On 09/07/14 17:52, Clint Byrum wrote: +1 for both. However, some of the reviews show what I think is a worrying trend in TripleO core. Specifically, nitpicking and tendency to bikeshed. Hi Tomas, thanks for your +1 and thoughts. FWIW, I'm a firm believer in progress over perfection and although I comment on the form, I try to score on the function. I'll get better at commenting to this effect, especially so if my nitpicking gains the weight of core. I love English and believe careful use is a great benefit, particularly in dense technical documents. You're entirely correct that this shouldn't be allowed to noticeably impede progress though. Alexis -- Nova Engineer, HP Cloud. AKA lealexis, lxsli. ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Proposal to add Jon Paul Sullivan and Alexis Lee to core review team
FWIW, I'm a firm believer in progress over perfection and although I comment on the form, I try to score on the function. I really like this phrase, comment on the form, score on the function. Lately I've been trying to be very specific about things I'm pointing out that are potentially a learning experience (This could be shortened into self.foo = foo or None), things that aren't a problem but the author might want to take into account (Consider...), or those that are actually problematic and would warrant a -1. I've found in the past that it's good to step back every so often and reorient myself. Thanks Tomas for the write up. I'll get better at commenting to this effect, especially so if my nitpicking gains the weight of core. I love English and believe careful use is a great benefit, particularly in dense technical documents. You're entirely correct that this shouldn't be allowed to noticeably impede progress though. Alexis ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] [TripleO] Proposal to add Jon Paul Sullivan and Alexis Lee to core review team
Hello! I've been looking at the statistics, and doing a bit of review of the reviewers, and I think we have an opportunity to expand the core reviewer team in TripleO. We absolutely need the help, and I think these two individuals are well positioned to do that. I would like to draw your attention to this page: http://russellbryant.net/openstack-stats/tripleo-reviewers-90.txt Specifically these two lines: +---+---++ | Reviewer | Reviews -2 -1 +1 +2 +A+/- % | Disagreements* | +---+---++ | jonpaul-sullivan | 1880 43 145 0 077.1% | 28 ( 14.9%) | | lxsli | 1860 23 163 0 087.6% | 27 ( 14.5%) | Note that they are right at the level we expect, 3 per work day. And I've looked through their reviews and code contributions: it is clear that they understand what we're trying to do in TripleO, and how it all works. I am a little dismayed at the slightly high disagreement rate, but looking through the disagreements, most of them were jp and lxsli being more demanding of submitters, so I am less dismayed. So, I propose that we add jonpaul-sullivan and lxsli to the TripleO core reviewer team. ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
