xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com>
To: Lars Kurth <lars.kurth.xen@gmail.com>
Cc: Daniel Izquierdo <dizquierdo@bitergia.com>,
	"Jesus M. Gonzalez-Barahona" <jgb@bitergia.com>,
	xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>
Subject: Re: Prototype Code Review Dashboards (input required)
Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2016 02:21:23 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <56D961A302000078000D93CC@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <F2DF8732-78FB-4E06-83FE-5A6DAE743B5B@gmail.com>

>>> On 04.03.16 at 10:05, <lars.kurth.xen@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 4 Mar 2016, at 08:42, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 03.03.16 at 19:55, <lars.kurth.xen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2 Mar 2016, at 22:45, Daniel Izquierdo <dizquierdo@bitergia.com> wrote:
>>>> On 01/03/16 18:04, Lars Kurth wrote:
>>>>> It may be better to use the following definition (although, others may disagree)
>>>>> A reviewer is someone who did one of the following for a patch or series:
>>>>> - Added a reviewed-by flag
>>>>> - Added an acked-by flag (maintainers tend to use acked-by)
>>>>> - Made a comment, but is NOT the author
>>>> 
>>>> We can update that definition. Do we want to have extra discussion with this respect?
>>> 
>>> I think that would be more correct. In particular, as we still will be able 
>>> @Jan, what is your view? This use-case was primarily created because of 
> 
> 
>> Two of your reply sentences seem to be missing their tails, so it's
>> really hard for me to tell my view, as it's not really clear what
>> you're asking for.
> 
> Apologies
> 
> I think that would be more correct. In particular, as we still will be able 
> to get the reviewed-by and acked-by flags from the tools we already have (and 
> they are also covered in graphs). They represent an outcome, but not really 
> the effort that is spent on reviews. And the comments as used in the other 
> panels, do not differentiate between people reviewing and responding to 
> reviews.
> 
> @Jan, the use-case to measure real review contributions was primarily added 
> on your request. Do you think the proposed definition above, is good enough?

Yes, the last bullet point should be what mostly addresses my
original concern. Some differentiation between Acked-by and
Reviewed-by may also help - remember that in the case of
maintainers we generally mean the latter to imply the former,
and that in the case of non-maintainers the former doesn't
really mean much.

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

  reply	other threads:[~2016-03-04  9:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-03-01 13:53 Prototype Code Review Dashboards (input required) Lars Kurth
2016-03-01 17:04 ` Lars Kurth
2016-03-02 22:45   ` Daniel Izquierdo
2016-03-03 18:55     ` Lars Kurth
2016-03-04  8:42       ` Jan Beulich
2016-03-04  9:05         ` Lars Kurth
2016-03-04  9:21           ` Jan Beulich [this message]
2016-03-07 17:24             ` Lars Kurth
2016-03-09 16:58       ` Daniel Izquierdo
2016-03-09 17:06     ` Daniel Izquierdo
2016-03-09 20:03       ` Lars Kurth

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=56D961A302000078000D93CC@prv-mh.provo.novell.com \
    --to=jbeulich@suse.com \
    --cc=dizquierdo@bitergia.com \
    --cc=jgb@bitergia.com \
    --cc=lars.kurth.xen@gmail.com \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).