Re: Reducing merge conflicts

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



> What gets measured gets managed.

Exactly.  Reviewing is part of everyone's job, but reviews aren't tracked
in any way that matters.  Contrast that with the *enormous* pressure most
of us are under to get our own patches in, and it's pretty predictable
what will happen.  We need to change that calculation.


> What I have seen at least is that it is easy to find
> people who sent patches, how many patches someone sent in a month etc. There
> is no easy way to get these numbers for reviews. 'Reviewed-by' tag in commit
> only includes the people who did +1/+2 on the final revision of the patch,
> which is bad.

That's a very good point.  I think people people who comment also get
Reviewed-by: lines, but it doesn't matter because there's still a whole
world of things completely outside of Gerrit.  Reviews done by email won't
get counted, nor will consultations in the hallway or on IRC.  I have some
ideas who's most active in those ways.  Some (such as yourself) show up in
the Reviewed-by: statistics.  Others do not.  In terms of making sure
people get all the credit they deserve, those things need to be counted
too.  However, in terms of *getting the review queue unstuck* I'm not so
sure.  What matters for that is the reviews that Gerrit uses to determine
merge eligibility, so I think encouraging that specific kind of review
still moves us in a positive direction.
_______________________________________________
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel



[Index of Archives]     [Gluster Users]     [Ceph Users]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [eCos]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux