On 7 March 2016 at 05:16, Andre Klapper <[email protected]> wrote: > > Apart from whether that statement is true or not: > Does the Team Practices Group encourage regular Gerrit patch backlog > grooming? If so, how, and is there any documentation available, or even > data which teams perform better or worse? Is there any differentiation > between "internal" patches by team members vs. contributed patches? >
I personally keep an eye on incoming patches to the projects I'm working on, and prod the tech lead to make sure that any patches from external contributors get reviewed promptly. If anything, this leads to patches from external contributors getting reviewed faster than patches from others. That said, the reason we can prioritise reviewing these patches so highly is because I've worked on teams that typically get so few patches from external contributors. If I worked on a team that got more, then I imagine we'd have to make a much more practical decision of limiting the amount of time we spend reviewing such patches. Disclaimer: I'm not a member of TPG, but I thought my perspective might be helpful. :-) Thanks, Dan -- Dan Garry Lead Product Manager, Discovery Wikimedia Foundation
_______________________________________________ teampractices mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/teampractices
