On 23 August 2012 04:37, Rob Lanphier robla@wikimedia.org wrote:
How is the process working for everyone? Is stuff getting reviewed quickly enough? How has it been for the reviewers out there?
I'm doing a lot of code review[1], but I feel like it's wasting my time by being inefficient. I'm still looking forward to diffs in emails and/or one page diff view in Gerrit. Especially re-reviewing big patches is just plain annoying when you have to go over all files just to find the changes.
My dashboard is mostly useless, it's full of -1 or +1 patches waiting for an action by the submitter. Or +0 patches I gave +1 or -1 before new patchset was submitted - they are indistinguishable from totally new patches. It would also be nice to have different queues for things like GSoC, Translate, sprint related, i18n review requested.
It has also happened that my inline comments have been ignored because a new patchset was submitted without addressing them, and subsequent reviewers didn't notice the comments anymore.
My own patches have been reviewed quickly, but that's because sprint related patches are reviewed by other team members and non-sprint related patches usually by Siebrand. There have been some exception for patches that need review for someone outside of our team.
[1] Since there are no statistics for this, I have no idea whether I'm doing more or less than average, but I'm definitely spending a lot of time on it. It's mainly the positive feedback I get that makes it rewarding.
-Niklas