On 12/03/2013 11:43 AM, Steven Walling wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 11:41 AM, Toby Negrin <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Feels like Engineering Community should represent these stakeholders. > > > Seems wise to me. > > Quim?
I don't think this problem is about volunteers missing stakeholders, but about patches missing reviewers. ECT doesn't have the skills or the permissions to review and merge patches. In an awful world, ECT could provide an ugly patch to this problem by nagging professional developers regularly so they pay more attention to the work contributed by volunteer developers. However, the root of the problem would still exist: teams of mainly professional maintainers not finding time for / not giving priority to contributions coming from outside of the team. A deep problem in any open source software project. What ECT is doing to help solving this problem is to work on metrics that will answer these questions: How long is the Gerrit review queue over time? How long does it take to review code contributions? Are we improving? Are Wikimedia staff and non-staff contributions processed equally? Who is doing better and worse? https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Community_metrics#Gerrit_review_queue Hopefully in a few weeks we will know better whether this problem is anecdotal or serious, and whether it happens in all teams/components or in some more than in others. Then we will see whether something can and should be improved in our team practices. -- Quim Gil Technical Contributor Coordinator @ Wikimedia Foundation http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Qgil _______________________________________________ teampractices mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/teampractices
