Thanks for sending out this reminder Mark! Comments inline:
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 5:23 PM, Mark A. Hershberger
<mhershberger(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
CRStats (
http://toolserver.org/~robla/crstats/) shows
that on December
24th we were had around 500 revisions left for review.
This wasn't too bad except that we CRStats shows we were supposed to be
closer to 300 revisions left.
Today is worse. We're up to over 600 revisions for review while Robla's
projections show that we're supposed to be closer to 200 revisions for
review.
I've been going over what we have, and it may not be all *that* dire,
though I'd like to get everything tagged before making that
pronouncement.
Here's the tagging we've got so far:
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/MediaWiki_1.19/Revision_report
There's a couple of big areas that stand out:
* "educationprogram": can we defer these until after we deploy?
* "socialprofile": doesn't block 1.19 deployment. My understanding is
that ashley would still like review on these, though. We can mark
these as "nodeploy", though that won't take them out of the graph
(only the revision report above)
Also, as an aside, I've added a couple of psuedo-tags to the graph:
http://toolserver.org/~robla/crstats/
The "newly new" psuedo-state is a plot of new revisions added in a
given week. The "reviewed" psuedo-state is all revisions that
transition from "new" to some other state in a given week.
This shows that the review load has been steadily rising over the past
year, which means even though we've been adding capacity, that's not
enough to keep up with out either slowing down a little bit to catch
up, or really stepping up.
Rob
Rob