Quim Gil <[email protected]> wrote: > [...]
>> This is also completely the wrong way to go about open-source development. >> The work priorities of volunteers are the thing that you, as manager of >> paid staff, *can't* control, as opposed to the work priorities of paid >> staff, which you very much can. > Agreed, and one of the reasons for producing these metrics is to help paid > developers prioritize their work taking into account the task of reviewing > the contributions they receive. However... > [...] This sounds like a guide to procrastination. "There was so much work to choose from, boss, so I did none." I'm still (a bit) interested in the effect of all this man- agement on improving the process (cf. http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.linguistics.wikipedia.technical/54497), but if the issue at hand is to review the ~ 2500 "code re- views waiting for reviewer", if every one of the ~ 100 WMF employees reviews one (additional) changeset per workday, the task will be done by the end of this month. There is already https://gerrit.wikimedia.org, "git review -l" and Jon's (brilliant) tool (cf. https://raw.github.com/jdlrobson/GerritCommandLine/master/gerrit.py) to pick a change to review; and the nice thing about reviewing all of them in a foreseeable time period is that you don't have to prioritize! Just pick any! Just in case it got lost in transmission: Pick any! Tim _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
