> 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
