Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2021-05-11
16:57:30 bauzas gibi: I'm not sure we need to restrict such label to the cores
16:57:39 bauzas if it's a signal about committing to review
16:57:39 bauzas if it's a signal about committing to review
16:58:01 bauzas this could also be a way for attracting people to the vows of review
16:58:01 bauzas this could also be a way for attracting people to the vows of review
16:58:08 gibi good point
16:58:08 gibi good point
16:58:34 sean-k-mooney well if you look at cinders usage its quite interesting
16:58:34 sean-k-mooney well if you look at cinders usage its quite interesting
16:58:42 sean-k-mooney value = -1 Branch Freeze
16:58:42 sean-k-mooney value = -1 Branch Freeze
16:58:44 sean-k-mooney value = 0 No Priority
16:58:44 sean-k-mooney value = 0 No Priority
16:58:46 sean-k-mooney value = +1 Important Change
16:58:46 sean-k-mooney value = +1 Important Change
16:58:48 sean-k-mooney value = +2 Gate Blocker Fix / Urgent Change
16:58:48 sean-k-mooney value = +2 Gate Blocker Fix / Urgent Change
16:59:08 sean-k-mooney they have it resticted to the core group
16:59:08 bauzas sean-k-mooney: that's very different from what gibi was suggesting
16:59:08 sean-k-mooney they have it resticted to the core group
16:59:08 bauzas sean-k-mooney: that's very different from what gibi was suggesting
16:59:30 fungi i have to agree, restricting access because of a fear of abuse is a premature optimization which can stifle involvement from newcomers. i recommend only restricting it if actual abuse is observed and is otherwise uncontrollable
16:59:30 fungi i have to agree, restricting access because of a fear of abuse is a premature optimization which can stifle involvement from newcomers. i recommend only restricting it if actual abuse is observed and is otherwise uncontrollable
16:59:50 sean-k-mooney bauzas: it is which is why i was highigly a different usage patteren
16:59:50 sean-k-mooney bauzas: it is which is why i was highigly a different usage patteren
17:00:05 bauzas sounds like we have a debate :)
17:00:05 bauzas sounds like we have a debate :)
17:00:42 sean-k-mooney fungi: wel part of the idea was to use it to replace oru old runway proces where anyone could add something to the queue but only core move thing into the runway slots
17:00:42 bauzas sean-k-mooney: just before you came back, I was exposing to gibi the fact that I don't think the signal is useful if it's just a ask for cores to review
17:00:42 sean-k-mooney fungi: wel part of the idea was to use it to replace oru old runway proces where anyone could add something to the queue but only core move thing into the runway slots
17:00:42 bauzas sean-k-mooney: just before you came back, I was exposing to gibi the fact that I don't think the signal is useful if it's just a ask for cores to review
17:01:06 bauzas sean-k-mooney: and gibi told me the crux of the idea was "commitment"
17:01:06 bauzas sean-k-mooney: and gibi told me the crux of the idea was "commitment"
17:01:20 sean-k-mooney bauzas: yes that is why it was going to be restrited to cores to set
17:01:20 sean-k-mooney bauzas: yes that is why it was going to be restrited to cores to set
17:01:28 fungi maybe look at it as being similar to bug triage. do you restrict who can set the severity on bug reports?
17:01:28 fungi maybe look at it as being similar to bug triage. do you restrict who can set the severity on bug reports?
17:01:45 bauzas sean-k-mooney: the problem is that we had a process with runways which didn't really work because of the lack of commitment
17:01:45 bauzas sean-k-mooney: the problem is that we had a process with runways which didn't really work because of the lack of commitment
17:01:52 sean-k-mooney fungi: its an open team but ithink the motivates are different
17:01:52 bauzas fungi: nope
17:01:52 sean-k-mooney fungi: its an open team but ithink the motivates are different
17:01:52 bauzas fungi: nope
17:02:15 sean-k-mooney bauzas: well not entirly
17:02:15 sean-k-mooney bauzas: well not entirly
17:02:24 bauzas sean-k-mooney: if we're creating labels for marking changes for reviews, we'll just recreate the runway process but gerrit driven this time
17:02:24 bauzas sean-k-mooney: if we're creating labels for marking changes for reviews, we'll just recreate the runway process but gerrit driven this time
17:02:46 bauzas which honestly didn't greatly work
17:02:46 bauzas which honestly didn't greatly work
17:02:53 sean-k-mooney bauzas: partly
17:02:53 sean-k-mooney bauzas: partly
17:02:55 bauzas gibi: sean-k-mooney: here is what I'm proposing
17:02:55 bauzas gibi: sean-k-mooney: here is what I'm proposing
17:03:25 gibi * gibi listens but pretty out of steam already today
17:03:30 bauzas we should Depend-On the ACL change to some new change in the contribs docs
17:03:30 bauzas we should Depend-On the ACL change to some new change in the contribs docs
17:03:42 bauzas that would explain the process
17:03:42 bauzas that would explain the process
17:03:56 bauzas b/c the acl change is just implementation
17:03:56 bauzas b/c the acl change is just implementation
17:04:04 bauzas but we miss the design phase
17:04:04 bauzas but we miss the design phase
17:04:08 sean-k-mooney sure no issue with that
17:04:08 sean-k-mooney sure no issue with that
17:04:21 fungi but yes, if the goal is to only ever have x number of "priority" flagged reviews, and you expect to have a limited number of people with the necessary perspective to decide which those are, then restricting the label might be a way of avoiding problems with coordination. it all depends on how you expect to use that signal
17:04:21 fungi but yes, if the goal is to only ever have x number of "priority" flagged reviews, and you expect to have a limited number of people with the necessary perspective to decide which those are, then restricting the label might be a way of avoiding problems with coordination. it all depends on how you expect to use that signal
17:04:38 gibi bauzas: I agree
17:04:38 gibi bauzas: I agree
17:04:46 bauzas gibi: take a break and just commit yourself about describing your ideal view on what should be the process for those labels in a separate change
17:04:46 bauzas gibi: take a break and just commit yourself about describing your ideal view on what should be the process for those labels in a separate change
17:04:49 gibi bauzas: and I sign up to write the proposal
17:04:49 gibi bauzas: and I sign up to write the proposal
17:04:59 bauzas cool
17:05:24 bauzas I'm way more interested in debating over this change rather than the gerrit one :p
17:05:24 bauzas I'm way more interested in debating over this change rather than the gerrit one :p
17:05:25 gibi thank you all for the input I really appreciate it
17:05:25 gibi thank you all for the input I really appreciate it
17:05:59 bauzas np, and it's late and I'm thristy typing
17:05:59 bauzas np, and it's late and I'm thristy typing
17:06:18 bauzas * bauzas will avoid the coronas and just use his keg again
17:06:20 sean-k-mooney bauzas: i will happily try and translate what ever ye decied into gerrit
17:06:20 sean-k-mooney bauzas: i will happily try and translate what ever ye decied into gerrit
17:06:32 bauzas sean-k-mooney: thanks
17:06:32 bauzas sean-k-mooney: thanks
17:06:42 bauzas folks, should be around unofficially tomorrow morning
17:06:42 bauzas folks, should be around unofficially tomorrow morning
17:06:44 bauzas ++
17:06:44 bauzas ++
17:08:50 gibi bauzas: o/.
17:08:50 gibi bauzas: o/.
20:28:48 melwitt dansmith: I noticed you reviewed the rbd error sanitize patch earlier today, it depends on this one below it that re-enables the rbd unit tests, if you wanted to hit that too https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/790511
20:28:48 melwitt dansmith: I noticed you reviewed the rbd error sanitize patch earlier today, it depends on this one below it that re-enables the rbd unit tests, if you wanted to hit that too https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/790511
20:40:22 dansmith oh sorry
20:40:22 dansmith oh sorry
20:40:43 dansmith I actually had that one open too and then just didn't look at it
20:40:43 dansmith I actually had that one open too and then just didn't look at it
20:42:25 melwitt thanks :)
20:42:25 melwitt thanks :)
21:00:11 lyarwood *facepalm* sorry about that melwitt
21:00:11 lyarwood *facepalm* sorry about that melwitt

Earlier   Later