Is it ok to Close PRs to indicate WiP?

[John Meinel]

I think you accidentally replied to just me, so I'm including juju-dev in
my reply.


On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 3:53 PM, Wayne Witzel <wayne.witzel at canonical.com>
wrote:

>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 5:02 AM, John Meinel <john at arbash-meinel.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Since we are now trying to have everyone regularly rotate into a on-call
>> reviewer day, and one of the goals of OCR is that you should try to touch
>> all open reviews. However, I'm finding a bunch of things that have already
>> been reviewed quite thoroughly and look much more like we are just waiting
>> for the person to do what was requested and then ask for review again.
>>
>> In Launchpad, we used Work in Progress to indicate this. I don't see any
>> equivalent on Github (you just have whether the current PR is open or
>> closed). I'm a little concerned that just Closing a request is going to
>> make it easy for the person who submitted it forget about it. However, I
>> also don't think we want all reviewers to have to poll through a large
>> backlog every day.
>>
>
> I've already seen some people changing the title of the pull request to
> WIP: <title> and then back after they are ready for review again, we could
> make that convention?
>
>

I think that is going to work better. I didn't realize that I only had
"Close" rights because all the team leads are still superusers on the
juju/juju project. So if general reviewers and submitters can set it to
WIP, then we need another process. Editing the title seems ok here.



>
>> I suppose a meta question exists, why do we have such a huge pile of
>> things that have been reviewed but not actually responded to by the
>> original person?
>>
>> Also, I do think we want to follow our old Rietveld behavior, where for
>> each comment a reviewer made, the submitter can respond (even if just with
>> "Done"). I realize this generates a lot of email noise, but it means that
>> any reviewer can come along and see what has been addressed and what
>> hasn't. Or at least follow along with the conversation.
>>
>
>>
> +1
>
>>
>> Thoughts? Is Closed to big of a hammer. Is there something else in our
>> process that we need to focus on?
>>
> Where are we at with moving to another review system all together? I think
> expediting that process should be a focus.
>

I asked Ian, and he said Martin is currently looking into it. That still
probably means a week or so before it would actively be useful.

John
=:->
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/juju-dev/attachments/20140617/c6cdc4aa/attachment.html>