Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] nominating James Polley for tripleo-core
+1 On 01/14/2015 07:34 PM, Robert Collins wrote: +1 On 15 Jan 2015 07:15, Clint Byrum cl...@fewbar.com mailto:cl...@fewbar.com wrote: Hello! It has been a while since we expanded our review team. The numbers aren't easy to read with recent dips caused by the summit and holidays. However, I believe James has demonstrated superb review skills and a commitment to the project that shows broad awareness of the project. Below are the results of a meta-review I did, selecting recent reviews by James with comments and a final score. I didn't find any reviews by James that I objected to. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/133554/ -- Took charge and provided valuable feedback. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/114360/ -- Good -1 asking for better commit message and then timely follow-up +1 with positive comments for more improvement. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/138947/ -- Simpler review, +1'd on Dec. 19 and no follow-up since. Allowing 2 weeks for holiday vacation, this is only really about 7 - 10 working days and acceptable. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/146731/ -- Very thoughtful -1 review of recent change with alternatives to the approach submitted as patches. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/139876/ -- Simpler review, +1'd in agreement with everyone else. +1 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/142621/ -- Thoughtful +1 with consideration for other reviewers. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/113983/ -- Thorough spec review with grammar pedantry noted as something that would not prevent a positive review score. +2 All current tripleo-core members are invited to vote at this time. Thank you! __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __ 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 __ 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
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] nominating James Polley for tripleo-core
Clint Byrum said on Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 10:14:45AM -0800: holidays. However, I believe James has demonstrated superb review skills and a commitment to the project that shows broad awareness of the project. Big +1. Thanks for taking the time to meta-review, Clint. Alexis -- Nova Engineer, HP Cloud. AKA lealexis, lxsli. __ 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
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] nominating James Polley for tripleo-core
On 01/15/2015 08:49 AM, Alexis Lee wrote: Clint Byrum said on Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 10:14:45AM -0800: holidays. However, I believe James has demonstrated superb review skills and a commitment to the project that shows broad awareness of the project. Big +1. Thanks for taking the time to meta-review, Clint. Alexis I don't get a vote, but just wanted to point out James' excellent contributions in chasing down neutron issues. Hmm, now that I've said it, I'm not entirely certain he'd have wanted me to :P ChuckC __ 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
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] nominating James Polley for tripleo-core
On Wed, 2015-01-14 at 10:14 -0800, Clint Byrum wrote: Hello! It has been a while since we expanded our review team. The numbers aren't easy to read with recent dips caused by the summit and holidays. However, I believe James has demonstrated superb review skills and a commitment to the project that shows broad awareness of the project. Below are the results of a meta-review I did, selecting recent reviews by James with comments and a final score. I didn't find any reviews by James that I objected to. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/133554/ -- Took charge and provided valuable feedback. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/114360/ -- Good -1 asking for better commit message and then timely follow-up +1 with positive comments for more improvement. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/138947/ -- Simpler review, +1'd on Dec. 19 and no follow-up since. Allowing 2 weeks for holiday vacation, this is only really about 7 - 10 working days and acceptable. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/146731/ -- Very thoughtful -1 review of recent change with alternatives to the approach submitted as patches. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/139876/ -- Simpler review, +1'd in agreement with everyone else. +1 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/142621/ -- Thoughtful +1 with consideration for other reviewers. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/113983/ -- Thorough spec review with grammar pedantry noted as something that would not prevent a positive review score. +2 All current tripleo-core members are invited to vote at this time. Thank you! +1 __ 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 __ 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
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] nominating James Polley for tripleo-core
In about 24 hours we've seen 9 core +1's, one non-core +1, and only one dissenting opinion from James himself which I think we have properly dismissed. With my nomination counting as an additional +1, that is 10, which is 50% of the 20 cores active the last 90 days. I believe this vote has carried. Please welcome James Polley to the TripleO core reviewer team. :) Excerpts from Clint Byrum's message of 2015-01-14 10:14:45 -0800: Hello! It has been a while since we expanded our review team. The numbers aren't easy to read with recent dips caused by the summit and holidays. However, I believe James has demonstrated superb review skills and a commitment to the project that shows broad awareness of the project. Below are the results of a meta-review I did, selecting recent reviews by James with comments and a final score. I didn't find any reviews by James that I objected to. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/133554/ -- Took charge and provided valuable feedback. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/114360/ -- Good -1 asking for better commit message and then timely follow-up +1 with positive comments for more improvement. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/138947/ -- Simpler review, +1'd on Dec. 19 and no follow-up since. Allowing 2 weeks for holiday vacation, this is only really about 7 - 10 working days and acceptable. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/146731/ -- Very thoughtful -1 review of recent change with alternatives to the approach submitted as patches. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/139876/ -- Simpler review, +1'd in agreement with everyone else. +1 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/142621/ -- Thoughtful +1 with consideration for other reviewers. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/113983/ -- Thorough spec review with grammar pedantry noted as something that would not prevent a positive review score. +2 All current tripleo-core members are invited to vote at this time. Thank you! __ 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
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] nominating James Polley for tripleo-core
Excerpts from Chuck Carlino's message of 2015-01-15 09:43:41 -0800: On 01/15/2015 08:49 AM, Alexis Lee wrote: Clint Byrum said on Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 10:14:45AM -0800: holidays. However, I believe James has demonstrated superb review skills and a commitment to the project that shows broad awareness of the project. Big +1. Thanks for taking the time to meta-review, Clint. Alexis I don't get a vote, but just wanted to point out James' excellent contributions in chasing down neutron issues. Hmm, now that I've said it, I'm not entirely certain he'd have wanted me to :P Awesome, so James is our Neutron person now. :) __ 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
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] nominating James Polley for tripleo-core
On 01/16/2015 07:39 AM, Clint Byrum wrote: In about 24 hours we've seen 9 core +1's, one non-core +1, and only one dissenting opinion from James himself which I think we have properly dismissed. With my nomination counting as an additional +1, that is 10, which is 50% of the 20 cores active the last 90 days. I believe this vote has carried. Please welcome James Polley to the TripleO core reviewer team. :) /me hands James is custodial mop and bucket Congratulations James and my condolences. :D Anita. Excerpts from Clint Byrum's message of 2015-01-14 10:14:45 -0800: Hello! It has been a while since we expanded our review team. The numbers aren't easy to read with recent dips caused by the summit and holidays. However, I believe James has demonstrated superb review skills and a commitment to the project that shows broad awareness of the project. Below are the results of a meta-review I did, selecting recent reviews by James with comments and a final score. I didn't find any reviews by James that I objected to. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/133554/ -- Took charge and provided valuable feedback. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/114360/ -- Good -1 asking for better commit message and then timely follow-up +1 with positive comments for more improvement. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/138947/ -- Simpler review, +1'd on Dec. 19 and no follow-up since. Allowing 2 weeks for holiday vacation, this is only really about 7 - 10 working days and acceptable. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/146731/ -- Very thoughtful -1 review of recent change with alternatives to the approach submitted as patches. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/139876/ -- Simpler review, +1'd in agreement with everyone else. +1 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/142621/ -- Thoughtful +1 with consideration for other reviewers. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/113983/ -- Thorough spec review with grammar pedantry noted as something that would not prevent a positive review score. +2 All current tripleo-core members are invited to vote at this time. Thank you! __ 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 __ 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
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] nominating James Polley for tripleo-core
On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Clint Byrum cl...@fewbar.com wrote: In about 24 hours we've seen 9 core +1's, one non-core +1, and only one dissenting opinion from James himself which I think we have properly dismissed. With my nomination counting as an additional +1, that is 10, which is 50% of the 20 cores active the last 90 days. I believe this vote has carried. Please welcome James Polley to the TripleO core reviewer team. :) I'm a little late to the party, but it was a +1 from me as well. James has been doing really valuable reviews for a while now. -- -- James Slagle -- __ 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
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] nominating James Polley for tripleo-core
+1 On 01/14/2015 12:14 PM, Clint Byrum wrote: Hello! It has been a while since we expanded our review team. The numbers aren't easy to read with recent dips caused by the summit and holidays. However, I believe James has demonstrated superb review skills and a commitment to the project that shows broad awareness of the project. Below are the results of a meta-review I did, selecting recent reviews by James with comments and a final score. I didn't find any reviews by James that I objected to. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/133554/ -- Took charge and provided valuable feedback. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/114360/ -- Good -1 asking for better commit message and then timely follow-up +1 with positive comments for more improvement. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/138947/ -- Simpler review, +1'd on Dec. 19 and no follow-up since. Allowing 2 weeks for holiday vacation, this is only really about 7 - 10 working days and acceptable. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/146731/ -- Very thoughtful -1 review of recent change with alternatives to the approach submitted as patches. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/139876/ -- Simpler review, +1'd in agreement with everyone else. +1 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/142621/ -- Thoughtful +1 with consideration for other reviewers. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/113983/ -- Thorough spec review with grammar pedantry noted as something that would not prevent a positive review score. +2 All current tripleo-core members are invited to vote at this time. Thank you! __ 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 __ 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
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] nominating James Polley for tripleo-core
+1 On 01/14/2015 02:26 PM, Gregory Haynes wrote: Excerpts from Clint Byrum's message of 2015-01-14 18:14:45 +: Hello! It has been a while since we expanded our review team. The numbers aren't easy to read with recent dips caused by the summit and holidays. However, I believe James has demonstrated superb review skills and a commitment to the project that shows broad awareness of the project. Below are the results of a meta-review I did, selecting recent reviews by James with comments and a final score. I didn't find any reviews by James that I objected to. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/133554/ -- Took charge and provided valuable feedback. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/114360/ -- Good -1 asking for better commit message and then timely follow-up +1 with positive comments for more improvement. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/138947/ -- Simpler review, +1'd on Dec. 19 and no follow-up since. Allowing 2 weeks for holiday vacation, this is only really about 7 - 10 working days and acceptable. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/146731/ -- Very thoughtful -1 review of recent change with alternatives to the approach submitted as patches. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/139876/ -- Simpler review, +1'd in agreement with everyone else. +1 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/142621/ -- Thoughtful +1 with consideration for other reviewers. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/113983/ -- Thorough spec review with grammar pedantry noted as something that would not prevent a positive review score. +2 All current tripleo-core members are invited to vote at this time. Thank you! Definite +1. -Greg __ 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 __ 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
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] nominating James Polley for tripleo-core
Thanks for the nomination Clint (and +1s from people who have already responded) At this stage, I believe we've traditionally[1] asked[2] the potential new Core Reviewer to commit to 3 reviews per work-day. I don't feel that that's a commitment I can make at this point. It's not something I've been able to achieve in the past - I've come close over the last 30 days, but the 90 day report shows me barely above 2 per day. I think my current throughput is something I can commit to maintaining, and I'd like to think that it can grow over time; but I don't think I can commit to doing anything more than I've already been able to do. If the rest of the core reviewers think I'm still making a valuable contribution, I'm more than happy to accept this nomination. [1] At least for the last 12 months or so, since I first started working on TripleO [2] more accurately, I believe we don't usually nominate a new Core until they've demonstrated their commitment by having already sustained 3 reviews per work-day for a few months [3] http://russellbryant.net/openstack-stats/tripleo-reviewers-90.txt On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 6:14 PM, Clint Byrum cl...@fewbar.com wrote: Hello! It has been a while since we expanded our review team. The numbers aren't easy to read with recent dips caused by the summit and holidays. However, I believe James has demonstrated superb review skills and a commitment to the project that shows broad awareness of the project. Below are the results of a meta-review I did, selecting recent reviews by James with comments and a final score. I didn't find any reviews by James that I objected to. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/133554/ -- Took charge and provided valuable feedback. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/114360/ -- Good -1 asking for better commit message and then timely follow-up +1 with positive comments for more improvement. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/138947/ -- Simpler review, +1'd on Dec. 19 and no follow-up since. Allowing 2 weeks for holiday vacation, this is only really about 7 - 10 working days and acceptable. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/146731/ -- Very thoughtful -1 review of recent change with alternatives to the approach submitted as patches. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/139876/ -- Simpler review, +1'd in agreement with everyone else. +1 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/142621/ -- Thoughtful +1 with consideration for other reviewers. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/113983/ -- Thorough spec review with grammar pedantry noted as something that would not prevent a positive review score. +2 All current tripleo-core members are invited to vote at this time. Thank you! __ 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 __ 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
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] nominating James Polley for tripleo-core
On 15/01/15 07:14, Clint Byrum wrote: Hello! It has been a while since we expanded our review team. The numbers aren't easy to read with recent dips caused by the summit and holidays. However, I believe James has demonstrated superb review skills and a commitment to the project that shows broad awareness of the project. Very well deserved. +1! -- Steve In the beginning was the word, and the word was content-type: text/plain __ 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
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] nominating James Polley for tripleo-core
Excerpts from Clint Byrum's message of 2015-01-14 18:14:45 +: Hello! It has been a while since we expanded our review team. The numbers aren't easy to read with recent dips caused by the summit and holidays. However, I believe James has demonstrated superb review skills and a commitment to the project that shows broad awareness of the project. Below are the results of a meta-review I did, selecting recent reviews by James with comments and a final score. I didn't find any reviews by James that I objected to. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/133554/ -- Took charge and provided valuable feedback. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/114360/ -- Good -1 asking for better commit message and then timely follow-up +1 with positive comments for more improvement. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/138947/ -- Simpler review, +1'd on Dec. 19 and no follow-up since. Allowing 2 weeks for holiday vacation, this is only really about 7 - 10 working days and acceptable. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/146731/ -- Very thoughtful -1 review of recent change with alternatives to the approach submitted as patches. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/139876/ -- Simpler review, +1'd in agreement with everyone else. +1 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/142621/ -- Thoughtful +1 with consideration for other reviewers. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/113983/ -- Thorough spec review with grammar pedantry noted as something that would not prevent a positive review score. +2 All current tripleo-core members are invited to vote at this time. Thank you! Definite +1. -Greg __ 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
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] nominating James Polley for tripleo-core
Excerpts from James Polley's message of 2015-01-14 12:46:37 -0800: Thanks for the nomination Clint (and +1s from people who have already responded) At this stage, I believe we've traditionally[1] asked[2] the potential new Core Reviewer to commit to 3 reviews per work-day. I don't feel that that's a commitment I can make at this point. It's not something I've been able to achieve in the past - I've come close over the last 30 days, but the 90 day report shows me barely above 2 per day. I think my current throughput is something I can commit to maintaining, and I'd like to think that it can grow over time; but I don't think I can commit to doing anything more than I've already been able to do. If the rest of the core reviewers think I'm still making a valuable contribution, I'm more than happy to accept this nomination. IMO we need to re-evaluate that requirement. None of us has done a great job at sustaining it, however as a team we've managed to at least get enough reviews done to keep the tubes flowing. I know that at one point we got really backed up, but what solved that was a combination of a few less patches getting submitted (probably because of the long wait time) and a few more reviewers being added. So having more good reviewers like yourself seems more important than having more perfect reviewers. Also the main reason for wanting people to do 3 per day is to maintain familiarity with the code. I think you've been able to remain familiar with your traditional rate just fine. __ 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
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] nominating James Polley for tripleo-core
+1 On 14 Jan 2015 19:15, Clint Byrum cl...@fewbar.com wrote: Hello! It has been a while since we expanded our review team. The numbers aren't easy to read with recent dips caused by the summit and holidays. However, I believe James has demonstrated superb review skills and a commitment to the project that shows broad awareness of the project. Below are the results of a meta-review I did, selecting recent reviews by James with comments and a final score. I didn't find any reviews by James that I objected to. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/133554/ -- Took charge and provided valuable feedback. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/114360/ -- Good -1 asking for better commit message and then timely follow-up +1 with positive comments for more improvement. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/138947/ -- Simpler review, +1'd on Dec. 19 and no follow-up since. Allowing 2 weeks for holiday vacation, this is only really about 7 - 10 working days and acceptable. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/146731/ -- Very thoughtful -1 review of recent change with alternatives to the approach submitted as patches. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/139876/ -- Simpler review, +1'd in agreement with everyone else. +1 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/142621/ -- Thoughtful +1 with consideration for other reviewers. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/113983/ -- Thorough spec review with grammar pedantry noted as something that would not prevent a positive review score. +2 All current tripleo-core members are invited to vote at this time. Thank you! __ 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 __ 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
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] nominating James Polley for tripleo-core
On 15 January 2015 at 10:07, Clint Byrum cl...@fewbar.com wrote: Excerpts from James Polley's message of 2015-01-14 12:46:37 -0800: Thanks for the nomination Clint (and +1s from people who have already responded) At this stage, I believe we've traditionally[1] asked[2] the potential new Core Reviewer to commit to 3 reviews per work-day. I don't feel that that's a commitment I can make at this point. It's not something I've been able to achieve in the past - I've come close over the last 30 days, but the 90 day report shows me barely above 2 per day. I think my current throughput is something I can commit to maintaining, and I'd like to think that it can grow over time; but I don't think I can commit to doing anything more than I've already been able to do. If the rest of the core reviewers think I'm still making a valuable contribution, I'm more than happy to accept this nomination. IMO we need to re-evaluate that requirement. None of us has done a great job at sustaining it, however as a team we've managed to at least get enough reviews done to keep the tubes flowing. I know that at one point we got really backed up, but what solved that was a combination of a few less patches getting submitted (probably because of the long wait time) and a few more reviewers being added. So having more good reviewers like yourself seems more important than having more perfect reviewers. I agree. The point of making a commitment is a social mechanism for 'this is a marathon, not a sprint'. Also the main reason for wanting people to do 3 per day is to maintain familiarity with the code. I think you've been able to remain familiar with your traditional rate just fine. 3 was an arbitrary number pulled out of the air. If folk can and do remain familiar with a lower review rate, thats fine IMO. Nothing should be considered permanent or set in stone. -Rob -- Robert Collins rbtcoll...@hp.com Distinguished Technologist HP Converged Cloud __ 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
[openstack-dev] [TripleO] nominating James Polley for tripleo-core
Hello! It has been a while since we expanded our review team. The numbers aren't easy to read with recent dips caused by the summit and holidays. However, I believe James has demonstrated superb review skills and a commitment to the project that shows broad awareness of the project. Below are the results of a meta-review I did, selecting recent reviews by James with comments and a final score. I didn't find any reviews by James that I objected to. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/133554/ -- Took charge and provided valuable feedback. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/114360/ -- Good -1 asking for better commit message and then timely follow-up +1 with positive comments for more improvement. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/138947/ -- Simpler review, +1'd on Dec. 19 and no follow-up since. Allowing 2 weeks for holiday vacation, this is only really about 7 - 10 working days and acceptable. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/146731/ -- Very thoughtful -1 review of recent change with alternatives to the approach submitted as patches. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/139876/ -- Simpler review, +1'd in agreement with everyone else. +1 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/142621/ -- Thoughtful +1 with consideration for other reviewers. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/113983/ -- Thorough spec review with grammar pedantry noted as something that would not prevent a positive review score. +2 All current tripleo-core members are invited to vote at this time. Thank you! __ 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
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] nominating James Polley for tripleo-core
Hi +1! Cheers, -- Chris Jones On 14 Jan 2015, at 18:14, Clint Byrum cl...@fewbar.com wrote: Hello! It has been a while since we expanded our review team. The numbers aren't easy to read with recent dips caused by the summit and holidays. However, I believe James has demonstrated superb review skills and a commitment to the project that shows broad awareness of the project. Below are the results of a meta-review I did, selecting recent reviews by James with comments and a final score. I didn't find any reviews by James that I objected to. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/133554/ -- Took charge and provided valuable feedback. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/114360/ -- Good -1 asking for better commit message and then timely follow-up +1 with positive comments for more improvement. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/138947/ -- Simpler review, +1'd on Dec. 19 and no follow-up since. Allowing 2 weeks for holiday vacation, this is only really about 7 - 10 working days and acceptable. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/146731/ -- Very thoughtful -1 review of recent change with alternatives to the approach submitted as patches. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/139876/ -- Simpler review, +1'd in agreement with everyone else. +1 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/142621/ -- Thoughtful +1 with consideration for other reviewers. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/113983/ -- Thorough spec review with grammar pedantry noted as something that would not prevent a positive review score. +2 All current tripleo-core members are invited to vote at this time. Thank you! __ 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 __ 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
Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] nominating James Polley for tripleo-core
+1 On 15 Jan 2015 07:15, Clint Byrum cl...@fewbar.com wrote: Hello! It has been a while since we expanded our review team. The numbers aren't easy to read with recent dips caused by the summit and holidays. However, I believe James has demonstrated superb review skills and a commitment to the project that shows broad awareness of the project. Below are the results of a meta-review I did, selecting recent reviews by James with comments and a final score. I didn't find any reviews by James that I objected to. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/133554/ -- Took charge and provided valuable feedback. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/114360/ -- Good -1 asking for better commit message and then timely follow-up +1 with positive comments for more improvement. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/138947/ -- Simpler review, +1'd on Dec. 19 and no follow-up since. Allowing 2 weeks for holiday vacation, this is only really about 7 - 10 working days and acceptable. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/146731/ -- Very thoughtful -1 review of recent change with alternatives to the approach submitted as patches. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/139876/ -- Simpler review, +1'd in agreement with everyone else. +1 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/142621/ -- Thoughtful +1 with consideration for other reviewers. +2 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/113983/ -- Thorough spec review with grammar pedantry noted as something that would not prevent a positive review score. +2 All current tripleo-core members are invited to vote at this time. Thank you! __ 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 __ 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
