Re: [openstack-dev] auto-abandon changesets considered harmful (was Re: [stable][all] Revisiting the 6 month release cycle [metrics])

On Thu, Mar 5, 2015, at 06:59 AM, Alexis Lee wrote: > Doug Hellmann said on Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 11:10:31AM -0500: > > I used to use email to track such things, but I have reached the point > > where keeping up with the push notifications from gerrit would consume > > all of my waking time. > >

Re: [openstack-dev] auto-abandon changesets considered harmful (was Re: [stable][all] Revisiting the 6 month release cycle [metrics])

Doug Hellmann said on Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 11:10:31AM -0500: > I used to use email to track such things, but I have reached the point > where keeping up with the push notifications from gerrit would consume > all of my waking time. Jim said if his patch was auto-abandoned, he would not find out. T

Re: [openstack-dev] auto-abandon changesets considered harmful (was Re: [stable][all] Revisiting the 6 month release cycle [metrics])

On Wed, Mar 4, 2015, at 07:24 AM, Alexis Lee wrote: > John Griffith writes: > > ​Should we just rename this thread to "Sensitivity training for > > contributors"? > > Culture plays a role in shaping ones expectations here. I was lucky > enough to grow up in open source culture, so I can identif

Re: [openstack-dev] auto-abandon changesets considered harmful (was Re: [stable][all] Revisiting the 6 month release cycle [metrics])

John Griffith writes: > ​Should we just rename this thread to "Sensitivity training for > contributors"? Culture plays a role in shaping ones expectations here. I was lucky enough to grow up in open source culture, so I can identify an automated response easily and I don't take it too seriously.

Re: [openstack-dev] auto-abandon changesets considered harmful (was Re: [stable][all] Revisiting the 6 month release cycle [metrics])

John Griffith writes: > ​Should we just rename this thread to "Sensitivity training for > contributors"? I do not think that only new contributors might feel it is negative. I think that both some new and long-time contributors do. My oldest patch is from July -- it's still relevant, just not

Re: [openstack-dev] auto-abandon changesets considered harmful (was Re: [stable][all] Revisiting the 6 month release cycle [metrics])

enstack-dev@lists.openstack.org >> > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] auto-abandon changesets considered harmful >> > (was Re: [stable][all] Revisiting the 6 month release cycle [metrics]) >> > >> > Doug Wiegley wrote: >> > > [...] >> > > But

Re: [openstack-dev] auto-abandon changesets considered harmful (was Re: [stable][all] Revisiting the 6 month release cycle [metrics])

From: John Griffith [mailto:john.griffi...@gmail.com] Sent: 03 March 2015 14:46 To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] auto-abandon changesets considered harmful (was Re: [stable][all] Revisiting the 6 month release cycle [metrics]) On Tue

Re: [openstack-dev] auto-abandon changesets considered harmful (was Re: [stable][all] Revisiting the 6 month release cycle [metrics])

ts considered harmful > > (was Re: [stable][all] Revisiting the 6 month release cycle [metrics]) > > > > Doug Wiegley wrote: > > > [...] > > > But I think some of the push back in this thread is challenging this > notion > > that abandoning is negative, w

Re: [openstack-dev] auto-abandon changesets considered harmful (was Re: [stable][all] Revisiting the 6 month release cycle [metrics])

> -Original Message- > From: Thierry Carrez [mailto:thie...@openstack.org] > Sent: 03 March 2015 10:00 > To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] auto-abandon changesets considered harmful > (was Re: [stable][all] Revisiting the 6 month rele

Re: [openstack-dev] auto-abandon changesets considered harmful (was Re: [stable][all] Revisiting the 6 month release cycle [metrics])

Doug Wiegley wrote: > [...] > But I think some of the push back in this thread is challenging this notion > that abandoning is negative, which you seem to be treating as a given. > > I don't. At all. And I don't think I'm alone. I was initially on your side: the "abandoned" patches are not real

Re: [openstack-dev] auto-abandon changesets considered harmful (was Re: [stable][all] Revisiting the 6 month release cycle [metrics])

On 03/03/15 05:35, Clay Gerrard wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 8:07 AM, Duncan Thomas > wrote: > > Why do you say auto-abandon is the wrong tool? I've no problem with > the 1 week warning if somebody wants to implement it - I can see the > value.

Re: [openstack-dev] auto-abandon changesets considered harmful (was Re: [stable][all] Revisiting the 6 month release cycle [metrics])

On Mon, 2015-03-02 at 13:35 -0800, Clay Gerrard wrote: > I think Tom's suggested "help us help you" is a great pre-abandon > warning. In swift as often as not the last message ended with > something like "you can catch me on freenode in #openstack-swift if > you have any questions" > Good, this

Re: [openstack-dev] auto-abandon changesets considered harmful (was Re: [stable][all] Revisiting the 6 month release cycle [metrics])

Excerpts from Doug Wiegley's message of 2015-03-02 12:47:14 -0800: > > > On Mar 2, 2015, at 1:13 PM, James E. Blair wrote: > > > > Stefano branched this thread from an older one to talk about > > auto-abandon. In the previous thread, I believe I explained my > > concerns, but since the topic sp

Re: [openstack-dev] auto-abandon changesets considered harmful (was Re: [stable][all] Revisiting the 6 month release cycle [metrics])

On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 8:07 AM, Duncan Thomas wrote: > Why do you say auto-abandon is the wrong tool? I've no problem with the 1 > week warning if somebody wants to implement it - I can see the value. A > change-set that has been ignored for X weeks is pretty much the dictionary > definition of a

Re: [openstack-dev] auto-abandon changesets considered harmful (was Re: [stable][all] Revisiting the 6 month release cycle [metrics])

> On Mar 2, 2015, at 1:13 PM, James E. Blair wrote: > > Stefano branched this thread from an older one to talk about > auto-abandon. In the previous thread, I believe I explained my > concerns, but since the topic split, perhaps it would be good to > summarize why this is an issue. > > 1) A co

Re: [openstack-dev] auto-abandon changesets considered harmful (was Re: [stable][all] Revisiting the 6 month release cycle [metrics])

On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 12:52 PM, James E. Blair wrote: > Doug Wiegley writes: > > > A default query that edited out old, jenkins failing, and -2 stuff > > would be helpful. A default or easy query that highlighted things > > relevant to the current milestone's blueprints and bugs would be SUPER

Re: [openstack-dev] auto-abandon changesets considered harmful (was Re: [stable][all] Revisiting the 6 month release cycle [metrics])

Stefano branched this thread from an older one to talk about auto-abandon. In the previous thread, I believe I explained my concerns, but since the topic split, perhaps it would be good to summarize why this is an issue. 1) A core reviewer forcefully abandoning a change contributed by someone els

Re: [openstack-dev] auto-abandon changesets considered harmful (was Re: [stable][all] Revisiting the 6 month release cycle [metrics])

Doug Wiegley writes: > A default query that edited out old, jenkins failing, and -2 stuff > would be helpful. A default or easy query that highlighted things > relevant to the current milestone's blueprints and bugs would be SUPER > useful to guiding folks towards the most useful reviews to be d

Re: [openstack-dev] auto-abandon changesets considered harmful (was Re: [stable][all] Revisiting the 6 month release cycle [metrics])

> On Mar 2, 2015, at 11:44 AM, James E. Blair wrote: > > Duncan Thomas writes: > >> Why do you say auto-abandon is the wrong tool? I've no problem with the 1 >> week warning if somebody wants to implement it - I can see the value. A >> change-set that has been ignored for X weeks is pretty muc

Re: [openstack-dev] auto-abandon changesets considered harmful (was Re: [stable][all] Revisiting the 6 month release cycle [metrics])

Duncan Thomas writes: > Why do you say auto-abandon is the wrong tool? I've no problem with the 1 > week warning if somebody wants to implement it - I can see the value. A > change-set that has been ignored for X weeks is pretty much the dictionary > definition of abandoned, and restoring it is o

Re: [openstack-dev] auto-abandon changesets considered harmful (was Re: [stable][all] Revisiting the 6 month release cycle [metrics])

Why do you say auto-abandon is the wrong tool? I've no problem with the 1 week warning if somebody wants to implement it - I can see the value. A change-set that has been ignored for X weeks is pretty much the dictionary definition of abandoned, and restoring it is one mouse click. Maybe put someth

Re: [openstack-dev] auto-abandon changesets considered harmful (was Re: [stable][all] Revisiting the 6 month release cycle [metrics])

John Griffith writes: > For what it's worth, at one point the Cinder project setup an auto-abandon > job that did purge items that had a negative mark either from a reviewer or > from Jenkins and had not been updated in over two weeks. This had > absolutely nothing to do with metrics or statisti

Re: [openstack-dev] auto-abandon changesets considered harmful (was Re: [stable][all] Revisiting the 6 month release cycle [metrics])

On 28/02/15 09:02, John Griffith wrote: > > > On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Stefano Maffulli > wrote: > > I'm not expressing myself cleary enough. I don't advocate for the > removal of anything because I like pretty charts. I'm changing the > subject

Re: [openstack-dev] auto-abandon changesets considered harmful (was Re: [stable][all] Revisiting the 6 month release cycle [metrics])

+2 I recently had a patch abandoned that had every right to be pulled off the list. It had fallen off my radar and was no longer relevant. As long as there is a way to restore the patch where appropriate, we should do it. Jay I have to agree with John. We have many more submitters than we have

Re: [openstack-dev] auto-abandon changesets considered harmful (was Re: [stable][all] Revisiting the 6 month release cycle [metrics])

I have to agree with John. We have many more submitters than we have core folks, and our current scaling limits tend to be around core and reviews, not around submissions, so making life slightly more difficult for submitters in order to make it substantially easier for core is a reasonable trade.

Re: [openstack-dev] auto-abandon changesets considered harmful (was Re: [stable][all] Revisiting the 6 month release cycle [metrics])

On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Stefano Maffulli wrote: > I'm not expressing myself cleary enough. I don't advocate for the > removal of anything because I like pretty charts. I'm changing the > subject to be even more clear. > > On Fri, 2015-02-27 at 13:26 -0800, James E. Blair wrote: > > I am