Stefano Maffulli writes:
> In any case, since Sean said that nova (and other projects) already
> remove unmergeable changesets regularly, I think the data are already
> "clean enough" to give us food for thoughts.
I am asking you to please independently remove changes that you don't
think should
On Thu, 2015-02-26 at 16:44 -0800, James E. Blair wrote:
> It is good to recognize the impact of this, however, I would suggest
> that if having open changes that are not "actively being worked" is a
> problem for statistics,
I don't think it's a problem for the statistics per se. The reports are
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 4:02 AM, Daniel P. Berrange
wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 09:51:34AM +1100, Michael Still wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 9:41 AM, Stefano Maffulli
> wrote:
> >
> > > Does it make sense to purge old stuff regularly so we have a better
> > > overview? Or maybe we sho
On 02/26/2015 05:41 PM, Stefano Maffulli wrote:
> On Thu, 2015-02-26 at 15:58 -0600, Kevin L. Mitchell wrote:
>> One thing that comes to mind is that there are a lot of reviews that
>> appear to have been abandoned; I just cleared several from the
>> novaclient review queue (or commented on them to
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 09:51:34AM +1100, Michael Still wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 9:41 AM, Stefano Maffulli
> wrote:
>
> > Does it make sense to purge old stuff regularly so we have a better
> > overview? Or maybe we should chart a distribution of age of proposed
> > changesets, too in or
Stefano Maffulli writes:
> On Thu, 2015-02-26 at 15:58 -0600, Kevin L. Mitchell wrote:
>> One thing that comes to mind is that there are a lot of reviews that
>> appear to have been abandoned; I just cleared several from the
>> novaclient review queue (or commented on them to see if they were sti
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 9:41 AM, Stefano Maffulli wrote:
> Does it make sense to purge old stuff regularly so we have a better
> overview? Or maybe we should chart a distribution of age of proposed
> changesets, too in order to get a better understanding of where the
> outliers are?
Given the ab
On Thu, 2015-02-26 at 14:18 -0600, Anne Gentle wrote:
> Do the features listed in the Release Notes each have appropriate
> documentation? So far we just link to the specifications for nova, for
> example. [1] So to me, it could be a focus on the specification
> acceptance means less time/energy fo
On Thu, 2015-02-26 at 15:58 -0600, Kevin L. Mitchell wrote:
> One thing that comes to mind is that there are a lot of reviews that
> appear to have been abandoned; I just cleared several from the
> novaclient review queue (or commented on them to see if they were still
> alive). I also know of a f
On Thu, 2015-02-26 at 11:45 -0800, Stefano Maffulli wrote:
> The interesting bit of those charts is that overall for OpenStack
> projects, it seems that the reviews (comments to patchsets) are arriving
> quite quickly but the new patchsets take a lot more to be submitted.
>
> Too much debating an
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/26/2015 01:45 PM, Stefano Maffulli wrote:
> The interesting bit of those charts is that overall for OpenStack
> projects, it seems that the reviews (comments to patchsets) are arriving
> quite quickly but the new patchsets take a lot more to be
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 1:45 PM, Stefano Maffulli
wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-02-25 at 21:15 +, Ian Cordasco wrote:
> > I read it the same was as Doug. I don’t think Jeremy was trying to
> > imply your reviews would move through more quickly if you reviewed
> > other people’s work. Just that, as wi
On Wed, 2015-02-25 at 21:15 +, Ian Cordasco wrote:
> I read it the same was as Doug. I don’t think Jeremy was trying to
> imply your reviews would move through more quickly if you reviewed
> other people’s work. Just that, as with most open source projects,
> there’s always at least 2 distinct
13 matches
Mail list logo
