On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 3:37 AM, Rob Lanphier robla@wikimedia.org wrote:
Our Analytics crew have worked out how to generate a graph that gives us a view into our code review backlog: http://gerrit-stats.wmflabs.org/graphs/mediawiki
Yay. I've been awaiting this. Great to have something now.
These numbers seem to be +/- 10 revisions, and not evenly off over the history, so bear that in mind as you look at the numbers. In particular, it seems to paint a slightly rosier picture for how we're doing on keeping up with the backlog than we are.[2]
The graph for new changesets fluctuates a lot. I would guess this is due to change sets submitted by user l10n-bot. Maybe it's a good idea to filter those out, to get a line that's a little easier to interpret.
As of this writing, there's 207 revisions that have neither positive nor negative reviews associated with them. That's still seems like a pretty big number. 30 of those are more than a month old, and some date back to May.
Add a third line that displays the open number of patch sets including comments?
How is the process working for everyone? Is stuff getting reviewed quickly enough? How has it been for the reviewers out there?
Review is a lot of work, especially if change sets are large. I try to do a lot of it, both i18n/L10n related, as well as "easy patch sets". I don't consider myself a well enough developer to approve the harder/larger patch sets.
For some of the deprecated methods replacements, I have recently teamed up with IAlex. Reciprocity works well in review.
A few things are very, very annoying. Most annoying is that pushing directly to master still appears to be possible, which completely removes patch sets from sight. They're there when you pull, but one actually has to inspect the git log to see it's there and who dunnit.
From what I understand, Chad is planning on plugging this hole, but
it's not going quick enough for me.
Cheers!
Siebrand