From a private chat:
techtonik> You say yourself - there is no people to review stuff, and that's a good indicator. techtonik> ..of something wrong. > there is something wrong, but that's not necessarily related to fun > or not in the way you are thinking about > writing patch is fun > and rewarding > reviewing them is not > reviewing a patch is boring, takes time to do it properly, there's no glory in doing it, and if you commit it you are taking the responsability > whereas writing a patch is easy, challenging/fun, and you can say "I did this" once it's applied > so it's understandable that there are so many patches and so few reviewers ... techtonik> Few key issues: techtonik> 1. responsibility to patch author, but not the blame, help make patches better without placing additional burden techtonik> 2. glory for reviews is solved by highscore system techtonik> 3. proper crediting rules are required to make 1,2 possible and everyone happy techtonik> 3.1. that means writing author, commiter and reviewers techtonik> (see example of Chromium commits and process) ... techtonik> We may need to maintain IPython Notebook with XML-RPC recipes to fetch the data. > knowing what to do is different from doing it ... techtonik> I agree, but many people ask about a plan. techtonik> They don't even know what to do.
The plan:
steal twisted highscores - http://twistedmatrix.com/highscores/ bzr get http://twistedmatrix.com/highscores/
chromium highscores - https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/top
subversion crediting guidelines - http://subversion.apache.org/docs/community-guide/conventions.html#crediting
- and chromium commit message format
- explain why everybody will be happy
- allow to use tools under their own licenses inside Python source tree
- or allow to use tools outside of Python source tree
- write tools to help with commit message formatting stuff