[python-committers] PQM?

[Christian Heimes]

Guido van Rossum wrote:
> [Hey Christian, welcome back! (It seems we hadn't heard much from you
> for a while...)]

Yeah, I had an acute case of burnout syndrome. I tried to do far too 
many things in parallel. I prescribed myself to focus on the most 
important tasks like my new apartment and my job first. Heck, some of my 
stuff is still in boxes! Relocating is sooo time consuming.

> As long as we're touting tools or processes that we have experience
> with, Google uses a combination of tools. One tool is similar to the
> buildbots, running tests *after* stuff has been checked in. A feature
> that buildbot is missing is that it tries to figure which checkin is
> responsible for a particular failure, and mails both the author of
> that change and the owner of the code (if different).

Our buildbot system has another issue. It's sending out far too many 
mails with too many text. The s/n ratio is bad which makes it tedious to 
study the reports. I'd prefer a summary once a day which lists the 
failing build bots, platforms and tests. Add some links to extensive 
test output, revisions and authors and you'd get a short report instead 
of ten extensive reports.

> Anyway, if we're going to change policies around submitting code, I
> would much rather see peer review become a habit than adopt a tool
> like PQM.

I agree!

Christian