As I mentioned to Nemo on the talk page, I want an easy way to see how my code review efficiency compares to other projects and to see which projects are getting more love than others. A few thoughts:
1) From http://korma.wmflabs.org/browser/repository.html?repository=gerrit.wikimedia... I can see it takes 3.2 days to get a review (I think - there are too many numbers to look at and no key to tell the difference) I can see on Echo http://korma.wmflabs.org/browser/repository.html?repository=gerrit.wikimedia... it is 10.7 days but want I really want is to see a league table type thing to tell where we are giving more attention compared to other projects.
2) Also I think an average review time is only really useful if it is based on data from the last month.
3) What about open patchsets - does average review time take into account that some patches still haven't got merged? If a patch has been sitting around for 100 days, I care more about this then an existing patch that got merged after 5 days. These should impact the average.
4) Also this dashboard is not actionable and has no call to action - why don't we show the most neglected patchsets on each page and encourage people to actually go and review them!
On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Quim Gil qgil@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 12:56 PM, Jon Robson jdlrobson@gmail.com wrote:
Introducing: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension_health
Interesting! I'm hopping between flights back to Europe, and I don't have time to review these metrics more carefully, but please check http://korma.wmflabs.org/browser/gerrit_review_queue.html and let me know what you miss.
-- Quim Gil Engineering Community Manager @ Wikimedia Foundation http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Qgil _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l