As I mentioned to Nemo on the talk page, I want an easy way to see how
my code review efficiency compares to other projects and to see which
projects are getting more love than others. A few thoughts:
1) From
http://korma.wmflabs.org/browser/repository.html?repository=gerrit.wikimedi…
I can see it takes 3.2 days to get a review (I think - there are too
many numbers to look at and no key to tell the difference)
I can see on Echo
http://korma.wmflabs.org/browser/repository.html?repository=gerrit.wikimedi…
it is 10.7 days but want I really want is to see a league table type
thing to tell where we are giving more attention compared to other
projects.
2) Also I think an average review time is only really useful if it is
based on data from the last month.
3) What about open patchsets - does average review time take into
account that some patches still haven't got merged? If a patch has
been sitting around for 100 days, I care more about this then an
existing patch that got merged after 5 days. These should impact the
average.
4) Also this dashboard is not actionable and has no call to action -
why don't we show the most neglected patchsets on each page and
encourage people to actually go and review them!
On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Quim Gil <qgil(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 12:56 PM, Jon Robson
<jdlrobson(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Interesting! I'm hopping between flights back to Europe, and I don't have
time to review these metrics more carefully, but please check
http://korma.wmflabs.org/browser/gerrit_review_queue.html and let me know
what you miss.
--
Quim Gil
Engineering Community Manager @ Wikimedia Foundation
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Qgil
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
--
Jon Robson
*
http://jonrobson.me.uk
*
https://www.facebook.com/jonrobson
* @rakugojon