Le 08/06/2015 10:51, Quim Gil a écrit : > Er, sorry, the previous email just left my mailbox too fast. > > The proposal below has a related Phabricator > task: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T101686 > > https://office.wikimedia.org/wiki/Health_check_survey_results/FY2014-15_Q3 > indicates a growing concern about code review. Our code review queues > keep growing, I'd say still faster than our concerns, and this trend can > only lead to some variation of *collapse*. > > http://korma.wmflabs.org/browser/gerrit_review_queue.html shows these > monthly snapshots of open chagesets waiting for review (-1 and work in > progress are not counted): > > May 2013: 250 > May 2014: 1033 > May 2015: 1549 <snip>
Hello, When I look at the korma page, the two first pages are for MediaWiki extensions that have been abandoned ages ago. Either because it was a one time proof of concept or it has migrated to GitHub. If we could archive / move to an attic all the bitrotting repositories that will surely help. mediawiki/core itself has 500+ open changes or a good third of the debt. If one could generate a list of changes per authors and then ask each author to move its patches forward, that would help. Remember the main reason to have a premerge review workflow was to put the responsibility of review in the hands of the author. If people don't babysit their patches, there is not much we can do I guess. -- Antoine "hashar" Musso _______________________________________________ teampractices mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/teampractices
