openstack team mailing list archive

[Mark McLoughlin <markmc@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 2012-05-09 at 19:58 +0000, Matt Dietz wrote:
> The problem here is there are two opposing points: the idea that there are
> too many core reviewers, and the idea that patches aren't being reviewed
> "fast enough." 
> 
> *Drags a yak into the room* Beyond that, what makes 20 better than 25, or
> 15, especially in light of the fact that we're not happy with how quickly
> reviews are moving?

I think the idea is that letting core reviewers know that their
membership of core is dependent on them actually doing reviews is an
incentive for core members to be more active reviewers.

> It seems like the answer here isn't just quantity, but a matter of focus
> and relative skill sets. I'm a core developer but, beyond code quality, I
> couldn't review in the best interests of functionality in and around KVM.
> Conversely, I'm sure most core developers couldn't do any better for
> XenServer. I liked the idea of lieutenants when it first came up almost 2
> years ago. Have we talked about reinstating that?

Yes, see the "Nova subsystem branches and feature branches" thread this
week

Cheers,
Mark.