On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 4:16 AM, Tim Starling <[email protected]> wrote: > On 23/03/11 12:05, Rob Lanphier wrote: >> If our code review system was working smoothly, I wouldn't mind >> delaying this. However, it's pretty clear that code reviews aren't >> keeping pace (be sure to look at revisions marked "new" in trunk): >> http://toolserver.org/~robla/crstats/crstats.trunkall.html >> >> I believe that once the reviewers get the hang of Git, they'll be more >> efficient, and be more capable of keeping up. I think paired with >> Neil's proposal[1] that we switch to pre-commit reviews, and we might >> actually be able to get back on a regular release cycle. > > What proportion of a reviewer's time do you suppose is spent battling > with Subversion? I thought most of it was just spent reading code. > > If you want someone to dig a hole faster, you don't buy them a > nicer-looking shovel. I think we have to look at the benefits of Git > carefully, and to weigh it against the costs, both of conversion and > ongoing. > > I think our focus at the moment should be on deployment of extensions > and core features from the 1.17 branch to Wikimedia. We have heard on > several occasions that it is the delay between code commit and > deployment, and the difficulty in getting things deployed, which is > disheartening for developers who come to us from the Wikimedia > community. I'm not so concerned about the backlog of trunk reviews. We > cleared it before, so we can clear it again. > > -- Tim Starling > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikitech-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l >
+1 _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
