|Expectations of core reviewers|
One of the action items from the nova midcycle was that I was asked to make nova's expectations of core reviews more clear. This blog post is an attempt at that.
Nova expects a minimum level of sustained code reviews from cores. In the past this has been generally held to be in the order of two code reviews a day, which is a pretty low bar compared to the review workload of many cores. I feel that existing cores understand this requirement well, and I am mostly stating it here for completeness.
Additionally, there is increasing levels of concern that cores need to be on the same page about the criteria we hold code to, as well as the overall direction of nova. While the weekly meetings help here, it was agreed that summit attendance is really important to cores. Its the way we decide where we're going for the next cycle, as well as a chance to make sure that people are all pulling in the same direction and trust each other.
There is also a strong preference for midcycle meetup attendance, although I understand that can sometimes be hard to arrange. My stance is that I'd like core's to try to attend, but understand that sometimes people will miss one. In response to the increasing importance of midcycles over time, I commit to trying to get the dates for these events announced further in advance.
Given that we consider these physical events so important, I'd like people to let me know if they have travel funding issues. I can then approach the Foundation about funding travel if that is required.
Tags for this post: openstack juno ptl nova
Related posts: Juno Nova PTL Candidacy; Review priorities as we approach juno-3; Thoughts from the PTL; Juno nova mid-cycle meetup summary: ironic; Juno nova mid-cycle meetup summary: bug management; Juno nova mid-cycle meetup summary: social issues
posted at: 17:16 | path: /openstack/juno | permanent link to this entry