Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Review metrics - what do we want to measure?

2014-09-10 Thread Ben Nemec
On 09/10/2014 03:57 AM, Steven Hardy wrote: > On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 01:54:20PM +, Jeremy Stanley wrote: >> On 2014-09-04 11:01:55 +0100 (+0100), Derek Higgins wrote: >> [...] >>> How would people feel about turning [auto-abandon] back on? >> >> A lot of reviewers (myself among them) feel auto

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Review metrics - what do we want to measure?

2014-09-10 Thread Steven Hardy
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 01:54:20PM +, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2014-09-04 11:01:55 +0100 (+0100), Derek Higgins wrote: > [...] > > How would people feel about turning [auto-abandon] back on? > > A lot of reviewers (myself among them) feel auto-abandon was a > cold and emotionless way to prov

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Review metrics - what do we want to measure?

2014-09-10 Thread James Polley
4 > > To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org > > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Review metrics - what do we want > > to measure? > > > > >> It can, by running your own... but again it seems far better for core > > >> reviewers to decide if a ch

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Review metrics - what do we want to measure?

2014-09-05 Thread Sullivan, Jon Paul
> -Original Message- > From: Jay Dobies [mailto:jason.dob...@redhat.com] > Sent: 04 September 2014 18:24 > To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Review metrics - what do we want > to measure? > > >> It can, by running

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Review metrics - what do we want to measure?

2014-09-04 Thread Jay Dobies
It can, by running your own... but again it seems far better for core reviewers to decide if a change has potential or needs to be abandoned--that way there's an accountable human making that deliberate choice rather than the review team hiding behind an automated process so that no one is to blam

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Review metrics - what do we want to measure?

2014-09-04 Thread Ben Nemec
On 09/04/2014 08:54 AM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2014-09-04 11:01:55 +0100 (+0100), Derek Higgins wrote: > [...] >> How would people feel about turning [auto-abandon] back on? > > A lot of reviewers (myself among them) feel auto-abandon was a > cold and emotionless way to provide feedback on a c

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Review metrics - what do we want to measure?

2014-09-04 Thread Derek Higgins
On 04/09/14 14:54, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2014-09-04 11:01:55 +0100 (+0100), Derek Higgins wrote: > [...] >> How would people feel about turning [auto-abandon] back on? > > A lot of reviewers (myself among them) feel auto-abandon was a > cold and emotionless way to provide feedback on a change

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Review metrics - what do we want to measure?

2014-09-04 Thread Jeremy Stanley
On 2014-09-04 11:01:55 +0100 (+0100), Derek Higgins wrote: [...] > How would people feel about turning [auto-abandon] back on? A lot of reviewers (myself among them) feel auto-abandon was a cold and emotionless way to provide feedback on a change. Especially on high-change-volume projects where co

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Review metrics - what do we want to measure?

2014-09-04 Thread Derek Higgins
On 14/08/14 00:03, James Polley wrote: > In recent history, we've been looking each week at stats > from http://russellbryant.net/openstack-stats/tripleo-openreviews.html > to get a gauge on how our review pipeline is tracking. > > The main stats we've been tracking have been the "since the last >

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Review metrics - what do we want to measure?

2014-09-03 Thread Joshua Hesketh
I've moved it back up the review chain for you :-) Rackspace Australia On 9/3/14 6:34 PM, Robert Collins wrote: We would benefit a great deal from having this sooner. On 3 September 2014 20:11, Joshua Hesketh wrote: On 9/3/14 10:43 AM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: On 2014-09-03 11:51:13 +1200 (+12

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Review metrics - what do we want to measure?

2014-09-03 Thread Robert Collins
We would benefit a great deal from having this sooner. On 3 September 2014 20:11, Joshua Hesketh wrote: > On 9/3/14 10:43 AM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: >> >> On 2014-09-03 11:51:13 +1200 (+1200), Robert Collins wrote: >>> >>> I thought there was now a thung where zuul can use a different account >>>

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Review metrics - what do we want to measure?

2014-09-03 Thread Joshua Hesketh
On 9/3/14 10:43 AM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: On 2014-09-03 11:51:13 +1200 (+1200), Robert Collins wrote: I thought there was now a thung where zuul can use a different account per pipeline? That was the most likely solution we discussed at the summit, but I don't believe we've implemented it yet (

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Review metrics - what do we want to measure?

2014-09-02 Thread Jesus M. Gonzalez-Barahona
On Wed, 2014-09-03 at 12:58 +1200, Robert Collins wrote: > On 14 August 2014 11:03, James Polley wrote: > > In recent history, we've been looking each week at stats from > > http://russellbryant.net/openstack-stats/tripleo-openreviews.html to get a > > gauge on how our review pipeline is tracking.

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Review metrics - what do we want to measure?

2014-09-02 Thread Robert Collins
On 14 August 2014 11:03, James Polley wrote: > In recent history, we've been looking each week at stats from > http://russellbryant.net/openstack-stats/tripleo-openreviews.html to get a > gauge on how our review pipeline is tracking. > > The main stats we've been tracking have been the "since the

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Review metrics - what do we want to measure?

2014-09-02 Thread Jeremy Stanley
On 2014-09-03 11:51:13 +1200 (+1200), Robert Collins wrote: > I thought there was now a thung where zuul can use a different account > per pipeline? That was the most likely solution we discussed at the summit, but I don't believe we've implemented it yet (or if we have then it isn't yet being use

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Review metrics - what do we want to measure?

2014-09-02 Thread Robert Collins
On 16 August 2014 02:43, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2014-08-13 19:51:52 -0500 (-0500), Ben Nemec wrote: > [...] >> make the check-tripleo job leave an actual vote rather than just a >> comment. > [...] > > That, as previously discussed, will require some design work in > Zuul. Gerrit uses a single

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Review metrics - what do we want to measure?

2014-08-15 Thread Jeremy Stanley
On 2014-08-13 19:51:52 -0500 (-0500), Ben Nemec wrote: [...] > make the check-tripleo job leave an actual vote rather than just a > comment. [...] That, as previously discussed, will require some design work in Zuul. Gerrit uses a single field per account for verify votes, which means that if you

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Review metrics - what do we want to measure?

2014-08-13 Thread Ben Nemec
One thing I am very interested in finally following up on, especially in light of the snazzy new Gerrit separation for CI jobs, is to make the check-tripleo job leave an actual vote rather than just a comment. This would clean up the (usually) many reviews sitting with a failing CI run, for the pu

[openstack-dev] [TripleO] Review metrics - what do we want to measure?

2014-08-13 Thread James Polley
In recent history, we've been looking each week at stats from http://russellbryant.net/openstack-stats/tripleo-openreviews.html to get a gauge on how our review pipeline is tracking. The main stats we've been tracking have been the "since the last revision without -1 or -2". I've included some his