Maintainership coverage plan: gitlab-shell
Summary
This is an implementation plan to address coverage gaps for gitlab-shell maintainership as part of WorkingGroupMaintainership
At a high level, we want to understand:
-
Are there any coverage gaps for gitlab-shell maintainers? This could be along several dimensions such as timezones, maintainer to engineer ratio, whether the current number of MRs per maintainer is healthy and sustainable.
-
If there are gaps, what are the data available to help quantify them. Any additional data that we should collect/instrument? What should be our target number over the next 6-12 months?
-
Any identified action items that can help us reach our targets if we’ve identified areas to improve coverage.
Identified Gaps
- "several years of Golang experience as a prerequisite" required to be a maintainer
- low number of merge requests/project contributions
- all groupsource code team members not currently maintainers
Supporting Metrics
Maintainers
Maintainer | Region | Type |
---|---|---|
@ashmckenzie |
APAC | Maintainer |
@patrickbajao |
APAC | Maintainer |
@igor.drozdov |
EMEA | Maintainer |
@proglottis |
APAC | Trainee |
@alejandro |
EMEA | Trainee |
@jcaigitlab |
AMER | Trainee |
Merge Request Statistics
Some data pulled from: gitlab-org/gitlab-shell#552 (closed)
- 61 open issues
- 5 open merge requests
- 7 merged in %"15.2"
- 27 merged in %"15.1"
- 26 merged in %"15.0"
- 10 merged in %"14.10"
- 6 merged in %"14.9"
Reviewer and Maintainer Targets (next 6 to 12 months)
There are currently 3 trainee maintainers. Once they become maintainers, it would bring the total to 6 which may be enough considering the low MR rate of the project.
Date | MRs expected | Maintainers needed |
---|---|---|
Today | 13 | 6 |
6 months | 13 | 6 |
12 months | 13 | 6 |
Action Items
-
Fix the danger job to properly display reviewers/maintainers -
Close the existing 3 trainee maintainer issues