Quim Gil <qgil(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
[...]
> This is also completely the wrong way to go about
open-source development.
> The work priorities of volunteers are the thing that you, as manager of
> paid staff, *can't* control, as opposed to the work priorities of paid
> staff, which you very much can.
Agreed, and one of the reasons for producing these
metrics is to help paid
developers prioritize their work taking into account the task of reviewing
the contributions they receive. However...
[...]
This sounds like a guide to procrastination. "There was so
much work to choose from, boss, so I did none."
I'm still (a bit) interested in the effect of all this man-
agement on improving the process
(cf.
http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.linguistics.wikipedia.technical/54…),
but if the issue at hand is to review the ~ 2500 "code re-
views waiting for reviewer", if every one of the ~ 100 WMF
employees reviews one (additional) changeset per workday,
the task will be done by the end of this month.
There is already
https://gerrit.wikimedia.org, "git review
-l" and Jon's (brilliant) tool
(cf.
https://raw.github.com/jdlrobson/GerritCommandLine/master/gerrit.py)
to pick a change to review; and the nice thing about
reviewing all of them in a foreseeable time period is that
you don't have to prioritize! Just pick any!
Just in case it got lost in transmission: Pick any!
Tim