On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 1:49 AM, Michael Adam <obnox@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Niels/Nigel,
On 2016-10-05 at 09:45 -0400, Ira Cooper wrote:
> "Feedback-given-by: <nosy.person@silly.place>"
Niels/Nigel,
Is this easier to do?
I like that one - thanks! :-)
Michael
> ----- Original Message -----
> > On 2016-09-30 at 17:52 +0200, Niels de Vos wrote:
> > > On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 08:50:12PM +0530, Ravishankar N wrote:
> > > > On 09/30/2016 06:38 PM, Niels de Vos wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 07:11:51AM +0530, Pranith Kumar Karampuri
> > > > > wrote:
> > > ...
> > > > > Maybe we can add an additional tag that mentions all the people that
> > > > > did do reviews of older versions of the patch. Not sure what the tag
> > > > > would be, maybe just CC?
> > > > It depends on what tags would be processed to obtain statistics on review
> > > > contributions.
> > >
> > > Real statistics would come from Gerrit, not from the 'git log' output.
> > > We do have a ./extras/who-wrote-glusterfs/ in the sources, but that is
> > > only to get an idea about the changes that were made and should not be
> > > used for serious statistics.
> > >
> > > It is possible to feed the Gerrit comment-stream into things like
> > > Elasticsearch and get an accurate impression how many reviews people do
> > > (and much more). I hope we can get some contribution diagrams from
> > > someting like this at one point.
> > >
> > > Would some kind of Gave-feedback tag for people that left a comment on
> > > earlier versions of the patch be appreciated by others? It will show in
> > > the 'git log' who was involved in some way or form.
> >
> > I think this would be fair.
> >
> > Reviewed-by tags should imho be reserved for the final
> > incarnation of the patch. Those mean that the person named
> > in the tag has aproved this version of the patch for getting
> > into the official tree. A previous version of the patch can
> > have been entirely different, so a reviewed-by for that
> > previous version may not actually apply to the new version at all
> > and hence create a false impression!
> >
> > It is also difficult to track all activities by tags,
> > and anyone who wants to measure performance and contributions
> > only by looking at git commit tags will not be doing several
> > people justice. We could add 'discussed-with' or 'designed-by'
> > tags, etc ... ;-)
> >
> > On a serious note, in Samba we use 'Pair-programmed-with' tags,
> > because we do pair-programming a lot, but only one person can
> > be an author of a git commit ...
> >
> > The 'Gave-feedback' tag I do like. even though it does
> > not quite match with the foobar-by pattern of other tags.
> >
> > Michael
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Gluster-devel mailing list
> > Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
_______________________________________________
maintainers mailing list
maintainers@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
--
Pranith
_______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing list Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
