[Gluster-Maintainers] [Gluster-devel] Reviews older than 90 days

[Amar Tumballi]

All patches which are more than 60days old:
https://hackmd.io/GYIwhsEMYOwLQGYAMBOATHALCmm4oEZgBTOGYgVgA5qxiqqY0g==#

AFR patches :
https://hackmd.io/BwTgbARgTAJmDMBaeVgDNEBYzAIaJFxhgPELRHlwHYBGMIA=
DHT patches :
https://hackmd.io/EYNg7AZghsUMYFoQBNkGYEBYCMICcCAHJmiAnsnttgEwAMemdEcQA===
libglusterfs/ changes:
https://hackmd.io/CwNgxghgDOBmC0BTEEBM9QGYCs8AcEARiPGAOyECcElqYAjCCkA=
glusterd & CLI :
https://hackmd.io/IYRgZgpgnArFYFoJgMZQQFgOwCMUKhGwQGZgAmNKANmWBiyA
storage/posix only:
https://hackmd.io/IwFgnAbBwQZgtGADAVmPEBTWL4EMBjAJgSIgGYAOSgdk2JsqKA==
performance xlators only:
https://hackmd.io/MbBsEMFMCMBYEYC0BOYAzATI2BmD5Fp4B2A5DAVlmgA5hjQATZeIA===#

Nigel, how would you want to go about this next?

On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Amar Tumballi <atumball at redhat.com> wrote:

> Did get hold of all the pending patches till 2017-05-20 (660 in total).
> Note that it includes "All open" patches.
>
> Attached is the file with all the details. Nigel, considering we have dump
> to have reference, can we go ahead and close everything which is 79 days
> old?
>
> Let me know if anyone wants CSV output of the pending patches, and what
> all the info they need?
>
> I recommend all the maintainers to go through the list and make sure they
> take appropriate action on all old patches. If people are lazy to go
> through all the patches, i can provide list of files changed per patch
> (url), so you can choose what matters to you.
>
> Regards,
> Amar
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 8:34 PM, Shyam <srangana at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> On 03/17/2017 03:22 AM, Nigel Babu wrote:
>>
>>> Hello folks,
>>>
>>> I put this up for discussion at the last community meeting, but I was
>>> unable to
>>> attend the meeting. We have a lot of reviews that are quite old[1]. They
>>> have,
>>> at some point, become unmergable or the person who proposed them lost
>>> interest.
>>> This is on us. We've let reviews slip through the cracks. There are also
>>> the
>>> odd cases when a second patch has been merged which fixes the actual
>>> issue, but
>>> the old one isn't abandoned.
>>>
>>> There's no way we can work our way through the entire list. I suggest
>>> that we
>>> abandon all patches with no updates in the last 90 days. If it hits on a
>>> patch
>>> that someone is particularly passionate to get merged in, they're
>>> welcome to
>>> re-open it.
>>>
>>
>> I agree with this, also it makes the dashboard more manageable.
>>
>>
>>> A. Current master dashboard: https://review.gluster.org/#/p
>>> rojects/glusterfs,dashboards/dashboard:master-dashboard
>>> B. Master dashboard (older than 90 days): http://bit.ly/2m8FX6m
>>> C. Master dashboard (only patches newer than 90 days):
>>> http://bit.ly/2mB0xsl
>>>
>>> If we abandon older patches, our master dashboard will look like (C)
>>> above.
>>> This means that there's already patches that are quite a few reviews
>>> that need
>>> some hand holding. Is it possible for us to catch up to the ones that are
>>> currently pending?
>>>
>>
>> We should focus on getting things out of the way at least in 90 days, one
>> way or the other. So, I would assume as we start using the dashboard, we
>> will have better focus on the "Awaiting Reviews Or Regression" section as
>> we go bottom up on that.
>>
>> So I would say we can catch up here (as in C), but not with B, so the
>> overall idea seems to be useful to reduce noise at first, and possibly
>> never get into this problem in the future as we catch up.
>>
>>
>>> [1]: http://bit.ly/2nfBq1N
>>>
>>> --
>>> nigelb
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Gluster-devel mailing list
>>> Gluster-devel at gluster.org
>>> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>> Gluster-devel mailing list
>> Gluster-devel at gluster.org
>> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Amar Tumballi (amarts)
>



-- 
Amar Tumballi (amarts)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/maintainers/attachments/20170524/27a767f2/attachment.html>