Finding worthy commitfest entries
I was looking through the PG20-2 commitfest this morning
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/61/
I had some spare cycles, so I was trying to see if there were any patches
that needed a review (and a reviewer). However, it's not really possible
to gauge that, as not all patches have the "Reviewers" field populated, and
there is also no way to tell how "active" a patch is. I'm going to
pick on two random ones for examples, that both show up when you hit the
"No reviewers" button:
1. https://commitfest.postgresql.org/patch/6689/
"Extensible sync handler registration"
This one has three posts, all from the author, and clearly is in need of a
reviewer. This one is an excellent example of what I was looking for.
2. https://commitfest.postgresql.org/patch/6652/
"Resizable shared memory structures"
This one looks the same as 6689 on the commitfest: one author, and no
reviewer. But the actual email chain is extraordinarily long and vibrant,
with lots of people weighing in. Pretty much the complete opposite of what
I am looking for, as I'm not going to spend hours reading that thread, when
many
people smarter than me have already weighed in. Yet, without clicking the
link to the archives, there is no way to distinguish the two patches.
Some ideas:
* More peer pressure to have people populate the Reviewer field.
Maybe not 'peer' so much as the commitfest manager. :)
* Let logged-in users add other people as reviewers. If I'm already opening
up the archived discussion, I could easily throw some names in as reviewers
from the thread. Then I can easily skip it next time.
* Have the main page show the number of emails in the thread.
* Have the main page show the number of distinct people in the thread.
* Have LLM give it a score and/or text summary, indicating how active it
is, and the likelihood of it needing a reviewer.
* Allow the author (maybe others) to add a flag such as "no reviewer yet"
or "help needed"
Other ideas are welcome. My primary goal is to be able to find and help out
"lonely" patches that need a review, without opening up every single thread.
Cheers,
Greg
Greg Sabino Mullane <htamfids@gmail.com> writes:
[ How to find CF entries that need love? ]
Some ideas:
* More peer pressure to have people populate the Reviewer field.
Maybe not 'peer' so much as the commitfest manager. :)
* Let logged-in users add other people as reviewers. If I'm already opening
up the archived discussion, I could easily throw some names in as reviewers
from the thread. Then I can easily skip it next time.
I think this is already possible by editing the CF entry -- at least,
I know I've been added as reviewer to some entries where I didn't ask
for that. I find that extremely discourteous and usually remove
myself immediately. To my mind anyway, being listed as reviewer
implies some ongoing time commitment, and nobody has any business
co-opting my time like that. So I'm -1 on this suggestion. But
yeah, we should encourage people to add themselves when they have
an interest.
* Have the main page show the number of emails in the thread.
+1 on this idea. It seems useful and I figure it must be quite
easy to obtain since the app is scanning the thread already.
* Have the main page show the number of distinct people in the thread.
Perhaps. It'd be good to be able to see whether anyone but the patch
author(s) have commented.
* Have LLM give it a score and/or text summary, indicating how active it
is, and the likelihood of it needing a reviewer.
* Allow the author (maybe others) to add a flag such as "no reviewer yet"
or "help needed"
Neither of those thoughts excite me too much. You can already see
whether there's a reviewer signed up.
regards, tom lane