[teampractices] Patch review culture of Wikimedia teams

Tue Mar 8 18:44:52 UTC 2016

On 7 March 2016 at 05:16, Andre Klapper <aklapper at wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
> Apart from whether that statement is true or not:
> Does the Team Practices Group encourage regular Gerrit patch backlog
> grooming? If so, how, and is there any documentation available, or even
> data which teams perform better or worse? Is there any differentiation
> between "internal" patches by team members vs. contributed patches?
>

I personally keep an eye on incoming patches to the projects I'm working
on, and prod the tech lead to make sure that any patches from external
contributors get reviewed promptly. If anything, this leads to patches from
external contributors getting reviewed faster than patches from others.

That said, the reason we can prioritise reviewing these patches so highly
is because I've worked on teams that typically get so few patches from
external contributors. If I worked on a team that got more, then I imagine
we'd have to make a much more practical decision of limiting the amount of
time we spend reviewing such patches.

Disclaimer: I'm not a member of TPG, but I thought my perspective might be
helpful. :-)

Thanks,
Dan

-- 
Dan Garry
Lead Product Manager, Discovery
Wikimedia Foundation
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/teampractices/attachments/20160308/03a7eaa6/attachment.html>