[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Incentives for review
From: |
Katherine Cox-Buday |
Subject: |
Re: Incentives for review |
Date: |
Thu, 28 Oct 2021 09:57:09 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) |
zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> writes:
>> I have often seen folks on various projects worried about the size of
>> various backlogs: bugs, issues, etc. I think it is human to want to
>> try and contain something that appears to be growing, unbounded.
>
> …about patches only. Bug is another story. :-)
Sorry, I meant to speak to both and instead repeated bugs with a different
word, issues! I think patches and bugs are similar in this context.
> Just number to fix the idea about large backlog.
I think it's really great that you went through the trouble to quantify this.
Thank you.
>> I think the thing that bothers us is a sense that the backlog is
>> becoming unmanageable, or too large to triage. I submit that this is
>> actually a tooling and organizational issue, and not an intrinsic
>> issue to be solved. Bugs may still be valid; patches may still have
>> valuable bones to modify.
>
> This is the point. What do you do? What could we improve about tooling
> and organisation to better scale and deal with this “becoming
> unmanageable backlog”?
I tried to give some ideas here[1].
> From my point of view, it is good to have this issue. It means that
> Guix is becoming more popular. And we – regular user, contributor,
> committer – have to adapt to this increasing workload, IMHO.
I totally agree!
> The question is how. And how to invite people to complete review. :-)
Humans usually enjoy community. I think the group activities are really great.
>> I think the real issue is that as a backlog grows, the tools we're
>> used to using cannot answer the questions we want to ask: what is most
>> relevant to me or the project right now?
>
> If it is relevant to the project then it is also relevant to me as an
> user. And vice-versa. ;-)
I think I did not give the proper context. I meant relevant as in "I am working
on this package. Is anyone else? What tickets might I update? What other
trivial bugs might I fix while I'm looking at this?"
I.e. relevant in the temporal sense.
> When something relevant to me is not making progress, it often means
> people are busy elsewhere, so I try to comment (review?) about patches
> or bugs. It is a Sisyphean task because the workload never
> decreases. :-) Or maybe structured procrastination. ;-)
I find it helpful to not think of it as a discrete task, but work along a
continuum -- a joyful habit of collectively helping everyone to have something
nice :)
"A society grows great when old (wo)men plant trees whose shade they know they
shall never sit in."
[1] - https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2021-10/msg00158.html
--
Katherine
- Re: Incentives for review, (continued)
- Re: Incentives for review, Jonathan McHugh, 2021/10/22
- Re: Incentives for review, zimoun, 2021/10/22
- Re: Incentives for review, Jonathan McHugh, 2021/10/22
- Re: Incentives for review, zimoun, 2021/10/22
- Re: Incentives for review, Jonathan McHugh, 2021/10/21
- Re: Incentives for review, Arun Isaac, 2021/10/22
- Re: Incentives for review, Jonathan McHugh, 2021/10/22
- Re: Incentives for review, zimoun, 2021/10/21
- Re: Incentives for review,
Katherine Cox-Buday <=
- Re: Incentives for review, Vagrant Cascadian, 2021/10/21
- Re: Incentives for review, Efraim Flashner, 2021/10/24
Re: Tricking peer review, Giovanni Biscuolo, 2021/10/20
patches for new packages proper workflow (Re: Tricking peer review), Giovanni Biscuolo, 2021/10/20
Re: Tricking peer review, Leo Famulari, 2021/10/20
Re: Tricking peer review, Christine Lemmer-Webber, 2021/10/25