Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC] Results of Phase 1 of the Review Process study

[Wei Liu <wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 06:32:37PM +0100, Lars Kurth wrote:
[...]
> 
> == Cycle Time [27] to [29] ==
> This is not quite obvious from the definition in 1. For the cycle time, we 
> basically ignore the mapping to a patch or patch series and just look at the 
> cycle times between review iterations *regardless* of which series it belongs 
> to.
> 
> For example [29] then tells us that the median cycle of any code review has 
> been fairly static around 5 days from 2012.
> 
> == Backlog Analysis ==
> This section shows us the total of patch series reviews that could be 
> modelled (60%) over the project's life-time 
> 
> Complete: 5641
> Active (aka activity in the last 7 days) : 78
> Ongoing (aka activity in the last 12 months): 403
> Stalled (no activity for 12 months): 600

Do note that this category covers several things: patches no longer
needed, patches superseded by newer version but with different titles,
patches to be upstreamed but lost momentum, so I wouldn't use this as
primary index for how bad the community functions. In fact I think it
shouldn't be given the same importance as the other two.

>  
> This is an area where time based diagrams would help, such that we understand 
> whether things have become much worse than in the past. On the face of it, 
> the figures are *worrying*: in particular if you consider we historically 
> have handled an average of 513 patch series a year, we have the equivalent of 
> - a year's worth of backlog which is active
> - a bit more than a year's backlog which is stalled - there is no way to 
> identify abandoned reviews  
> 

I notice that you noticed the same thing. :-)

Wei.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel