I suggest discussing the implementation details on phabricator. Moreover, I second Lucas point on the tone. physikerwelt https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct
physikerwelt https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct
On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 1:43 PM Lucas Werkmeister lucas.werkmeister@wikimedia.de wrote:
Am Di., 22. Jan. 2019 um 13:25 Uhr schrieb Chad innocentkiller@gmail.com:
Dumb straw man.
can we avoid this tone? thanks
Who said these people have too much workload?
Um, Thiemo himself has said this? Are you going to tell him that he’s wrong about his own workload?
The blame attribution has zero insight into how
busy someone is.
Correct, which is why it’s a bad idea to let it run loose and add people who are already busy enough as reviewers.
If it's a low-traffic repository there's likely to be fewer overall contributors. Fewer contributors increases the likelihood of people being qualified to review--whereas a high-traffic repo is more likely to have drive-by contributor less capable.
Well, many drive-by contributions are tree-wide: they are applied to a large set of repositories collectively, e. g. all Wikimedia-deployed extensions or even all repositories. If a repository has generally low traffic, then these tree-wide drive-by contributions will make up a larger ratio of its commits than in repositories with more repository-specific commits.
I’m not sure if I phrased this well, but if repository A has 1000 specific commits and 10 drive-by commits, and repository B has 20 specific commits and the same 10 drive-by commits, then the drive-by commits will be ⅓ of all commits in repository B but less than .1% in repository A.
And if it's just one-line typofixing it'd be ideal to exclude those from the blame list--but we can't possibly know what was a one-line typofix and what was a one line that saved us 50% of execution time on all pages. At least not programmatically.
True to some extent, but then we should err on the side of not adding the reviewer, no? Otherwise we run the risk of overwhelming them with changes they’re not even qualified to review, even if they had the time.
Honestly, if you think "people who've edited the code in the past" are a poor person to ask for review then you do not understand how code review works.
Suggesting that Thiemo doesn’t understand how code review works is… bold, in my opinion, let’s put it that way. May I point out that he’s one of the top +2ers across all MediaWiki extensions https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2019-January/091340.html?
Cheers, Lucas
-- Lucas Werkmeister Full Stack Developer
Wikimedia Deutschland e. V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin Phone: +49 (0)30 219 158 26-0 https://wikimedia.de
Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. Help us to achieve our vision! https://spenden.wikimedia.de
Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V. Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/029/42207. _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l