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

[Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>]

On Fri, 2015-10-16 at 10:29 +0100, Lars Kurth wrote:
> > On 16 Oct 2015, at 10:19, Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > * To consider that when there is no activity for a certain period,
> > > the
> > > review is no longer going to progress, and can be considered
> > > abandoned.
> > > The main trouble with this could be that we have seen some patch
> > > series
> > > inactive for very long periods, and still coming back to life after
> > > that. But being a very small fraction of the cases, for statistical
> > > purposes those could be considered as abandoned.
> > 
> > Yes, and I suppose based on data mining you can see the longest delay
> > before "coming back to life", which would then feed into the selection
> > of
> > the certain period.
> 
> Let's see what we can do. I am wondering whether there is some tool,
> where you put in two lists, you run an algorithm over it and out comes
> the most optimal matching pattern, matching the maximum set of entries.
> 
> If I think about the possible users for what phase 2 will deliver, I see
> a number of different stake-holders / use-cases
> a) Community manager : requires some reports that are statistically sound
> b) Developers : something to make your life easier - requires better
> matching 
> c) Recognition of reviewers and their effort
> d) There may be some more ...

FWIW as far as b) goes I think I don't expect anything to make things
easier as such more like "facilitates a) while not being an undue burden".

Where "a" may certainly lead to thing which make life easier for "b"
though.

Ian.