On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 8:44 PM, Rob Lanphier robla@wikimedia.org wrote:
- Code review is falling back behind. As of right now, we have 38
unreviewed revisions in core (phase3), and another 189 unreviewed revisions in extensions. That's up from the 4 core + 28 extensions on February 4. We basically let code review get back out of hand as we've turned our focus toward bugfixing in deployment.
That was last week. This week, it's even more grim: * New (unreviewed): ** core: 49 ** extensions: 242 * Fixme: ** core: 8 ** extensions: 19
The graph: http://toolserver.org/~robla/crstats/
The trendline doesn't look good. What can we do to get back on the right track?
Rob
Rob Lanphier wrote:
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 8:44 PM, Rob Lanphier robla@wikimedia.org wrote:
- Code review is falling back behind. As of right now, we have 38
unreviewed revisions in core (phase3), and another 189 unreviewed revisions in extensions. That's up from the 4 core + 28 extensions on February 4. We basically let code review get back out of hand as we've turned our focus toward bugfixing in deployment.
That was last week. This week, it's even more grim:
- New (unreviewed):
** core: 49 ** extensions: 242
- Fixme:
** core: 8 ** extensions: 19
The graph: http://toolserver.org/~robla/crstats/
The trendline doesn't look good. What can we do to get back on the right track?
With what percent of time devoted to code review? There's a 20% rule, isn't there? Is that being followed? Is the percent higher? Lower? That's surely a useful metric when looking at a problem like this. Because code review is ultimately about... doing code review. wikitech-l has no secret answer.
MZMcBride
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org