2:18 a.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ayal Baron" <abaron(a)redhat.com>
To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl(a)redhat.com>
Cc: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com>, "engine-devel"
<engine-devel(a)ovirt.org>, vdsm-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 10:09:46 AM
Subject: Re: [vdsm] stale gerrit patches
----- Original Message -----
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Ayal Baron" <abaron(a)redhat.com>
> > To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl(a)redhat.com>
> > Cc: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com>, "engine-devel"
> > <engine-devel(a)ovirt.org>, vdsm-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 9:20:55 AM
> > Subject: Re: [vdsm] stale gerrit patches
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Ayal Baron" <abaron(a)redhat.com>
> > > > To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl(a)redhat.com>
> > > > Cc: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com>,
"engine-devel"
> > > > <engine-devel(a)ovirt.org>, vdsm-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 12:21:23 AM
> > > > Subject: Re: [vdsm] stale gerrit patches
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > From: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > Cc: "David Caro" <dcaroest(a)redhat.com>,
"engine-devel"
> > > > > > <engine-devel(a)ovirt.org>,
vdsm-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
> > > > > > Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 1:54:39 PM
> > > > > > Subject: Re: [vdsm] stale gerrit patches
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 09/23/2013 01:52 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > >> From: "Itamar Heim"
<iheim(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > >> To: "Alon Bar-Lev"
<alonbl(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > >> Cc: "David Caro"
<dcaroest(a)redhat.com>, "engine-devel"
> > > > > > >> <engine-devel(a)ovirt.org>,
vdsm-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
> > > > > > >> Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 1:50:35 PM
> > > > > > >> Subject: Re: [vdsm] stale gerrit patches
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> On 09/23/2013 01:49 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > >>>> From: "Itamar Heim"
<iheim(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > >>>> To: "David Caro"
<dcaroest(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > >>>> Cc: "engine-devel"
<engine-devel(a)ovirt.org>,
> > > > > > >>>> vdsm-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
> > > > > > >>>> Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 1:47:47
PM
> > > > > > >>>> Subject: Re: [vdsm] stale gerrit patches
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>> On 09/23/2013 01:46 PM, David Caro wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>> On Mon 23 Sep 2013 12:36:58 PM CEST,
Itamar Heim wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>>> we have some very old gerrit
patches.
> > > > > > >>>>>> I'm for abandoning patches
which were not touched over 60
> > > > > > >>>>>> days
> > > > > > >>>>>> (to
> > > > > > >>>>>> begin with, I think the number
should actually be lower).
> > > > > > >>>>>> they can always be re-opened by
any interested party post
> > > > > > >>>>>> their
> > > > > > >>>>>> closure.
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> i.e., looking at gerrit, the patch
list should actually
> > > > > > >>>>>> get
> > > > > > >>>>>> attention,
> > > > > > >>>>>> and not be a few worth looking at,
with a "lot of old
> > > > > > >>>>>> patches"
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> thoughts?
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> Thanks,
> > > > > > >>>>>> Itamar
> > > > > > >>>>>>
_______________________________________________
> > > > > > >>>>>> vdsm-devel mailing list
> > > > > > >>>>>> vdsm-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
> > > > > > >>>>>>
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/vdsm-devel
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>> It might helpful to have a cron-like
script that checks the
> > > > > > >>>>> age
> > > > > > >>>>> of
> > > > > > >>>>> the
> > > > > > >>>>> posts and first notifies the sender,
the reviewers and the
> > > > > > >>>>> maintainer,
> > > > > > >>>>> and if the patch is not updated in a
certain period just
> > > > > > >>>>> abandons
> > > > > > >>>>> it.
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>> yep - warn after X days via email to just
owner (or all
> > > > > > >>>> subscribed
> > > > > > >>>> to
> > > > > > >>>> the patch), and close if no activity for
X+14 days or
> > > > > > >>>> something
> > > > > > >>>> like
> > > > > > >>>> that.
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> This will be annoying.
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> And there are patches that pending with good
reason.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> pending for 60 days with zero activity on them (no
comment, no
> > > > > > >> rebase,
> > > > > > >> nothing)?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/q/status:open+project:ovirt-engine+branch:maste...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > so how does it help us to have these patches, some without
any
> > > > > > comment
> > > > > > from any reviewer.
> > > > > > lets get them reviewed and decide one way or the other,
rather
> > > > > > than
> > > > > > let
> > > > > > them get old and stay forever
> > > > >
> > > > > Again... maintainer can close these if he likes.
> > > > > Owner can close these if he likes.
> > > >
> > > > right, but why?
> > > > a patch without activity being abandoned might actually spur someone
> > > > into
> > > > motion (rebasing and resubmitting, prodding maintainers etc).
> > > > I'm +1 for automatically abandoning old patches.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I do not understand why maintainer should not have human interaction
> > > with
> > > its
> > > contributers.
> >
> > I do not understand the relation between the subject and the things
> > you're
> > saying.
> > Right now these patches are stale and are rotting, abandoning them could
> > actually spur those interactions into motion.
>
> You prefer machines to interact with contributers to kick them in motion.
> I believe that human interaction and discussion between maintainer and
> contributer is the way to go.
> It is much more polite and cooperative for maintainer that is not aware of
> anything blocking a progress to kindly interact with contributer and
> finally
> close the change if contributer is unresponsive and/or change has no value.
Personally I see nothing impolite about automatically abandoning patches if
it is clear to contributors that this the expected behaviour.
It has nothing to do with polite, but build relationship between people and not force
people to reopen important changes and explain them-selves every time a machine decides
to.
Other projects abandon automatically after a week and from what
I've seen
that is working well to get things in motion and get those interactions that
you (and I) want, rolling.
The herd argument is never accepted by me, the herd seldom has definite wisdom.
I would like maintainers to build human relationship with their contributers it is more
important than having one or two extra changes in queue, as these relationships will serve
us at other plains as well.
So our mission is indeed different... you are interested in rolling, while I am in
creating ecosystem of people, which eventually will roll much faster.
>
> >
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > > The problem is that maintainers avoid closing.
> > > > > And that there are people who submitted patches without CC
anyone
> > > > > and
> > > > > gone.
> > > > >
> > > > > So a simple logic can be applied after we add metadata into
tree:
> > > > >
> > > > > 1. If no maintainer is CCed on change, close that change within
> > > > > short
> > > > > cycle
> > > > > (can be even a week).
> > > > > 2. Maintainer to close patches that have no interest in.
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> Maintainers can close patches that are no
interest nor
> > > > > > >>> progress.
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> Alon
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > vdsm-devel mailing list
> > > > > vdsm-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
> > > > > https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/vdsm-devel
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>