launchpad-dev team mailing list archive

[Tom Berger <tom.berger@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

2009/9/10 Karl Fogel <karl.fogel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> Curtis Hovey <curtis.hovey@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> On Wed, 2009-09-09 at 19:03 -0400, Karl Fogel wrote:
>> ...
>>> My guess is most people who use IRC know how to ignore the chatter
>>> around them, when they're focused on a particular conversation.  Do we
>>> have evidence or experience to suggest that doing reviews in the dev
>>> channel was a real problem?  If we don't, I'd really like to try merging
>>> it back into #launchpad-dev and seeing what happens.
>>
>> I think combining would be a mistake. This is the place to ask for a
>> review and offer to do a review. Reviews are interactive and on demand.
>> with 3 reviewers a a queue of 8 branches we need to keep the
>> conversation focused, and we do.
>>
>> Note that the topic for the channel is a tool for us... who is
>> reviewing, who is being reviewed, who is in the queue. The topic changes
>> many times an hour.
>
> I can see I'm losing the vote :-)

Let me give you some support.

When we came up with on call reviews and the reviews channel, there
were two things very different from now:

1. Only about a third of the developers on the regular team were reviewers.
2. We wanted a channel that's focused on code, rather than operation.

We're now at a point where all reviewers on the Canonical team (and I
hope soon also some of our regular volunteering saints) can review
code, so going into the development channel and asking who can help
with a review makes more sense than it used to.

Also, since Launchpad became free software, we do most development
discussion on Freenode, and keep only operational stuff for
Canonical-internal discussion. This means that we already have a
distinction between an operational channel and a development one. From
what I've seen, Launchpad-dev is not particularly busy, and most of
the discussion going on there is around activities that are at least
somewhat related to code.

I'd like the two channel to be merged, since I find it useful to lurk,
and the more channels there are the more costly it is for me to do
monitor them when I have free cycles. I also agree with Karl's
argument that this will be more user (developer?) -friendly.

Tom