On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 2:36 AM, Rob Lanphier robla@wikimedia.org wrote:
As far as "people being assigned to the the task of evaluating them", I think you may be overestimating the number of people we have floating around to do this work. "People" is basically Chad, who is pretty burnt out on working on this, and is exasperated with this process, but without drafting someone outside my group (like you?) :), I don't have many options. Having Chad do this means taking one of our most experienced MediaWiki developers, and having him not work on MediaWiki, but instead, do more evaluation of code review tools.
Before doing that to Chad, I'm asking people who believe passionately that we need to move off Gerrit to actually tell us what they'd like to move to in a structured, constructive way. I don't think that's too much to ask.
I'd like to just clarify Rob's comments here, since they're about me :)
When Rob says "burnt out," I really am tired. This process has been very draining, but necessary. It's very important that we get this right, which is why I've been committed since day 1 to helping absolutely everyone with absolutely everything relating to Git. Got a question? Ask me. Need a new repo? Ask me. But being a one-man-army tires you after awhile and that's where I'm at right now. But like I said, I'm committed to seeing this through and making sure we're in the best possible position going forward.
I feel like "exasperated" has a bit of a negative connotation to it. Better way to describe it would be "would very much like for this to find resolution so I can fade back into obscurity and work on cool things again, like Config overhaul which I really really want to see done so much." :)
Again, I'm here to support the community on this. Whatever the end result is, I'll be behind it.
-Chad