Provide basic policy that core reviewers can apply to outstanding reviews. As always, it us up to the core reviewers discretion on whether a patch should or should not be abandoned. This policy is just a baseline with some basic rules.
TripleO consists of many different projects in which many patches become stale or simply forgotten. This can lead to problems when trying to review the current patches for a given project.
If a proposed patch has been marked -1 WIP by the author but has sat idle for more than 180 days, a core reviewer should abandon the change with a reference to this policy.
If a proposed patch is submitted and given a -2 and the patch has sat idle for 90 days with no effort to address the -2, a core reviewer should abandon the change with a reference to this policy.
If a proposed patch becomes stale by ending up with a -1 from CI for 90 days and no activity to resolve the issues, a core reviewer should abandon the change with a reference to this policy.
If a proposed patch has no feedback but is +1 from CI, a core reviewer should not abandon such changes.
If a proposed patch a given a -1 by a reviewer but the patch is +1 from CI and not in merge conflict and the author becomes unresponsive for a few weeks, reviewers can leave a reminder comment on the review to see if there is still interest in the patch. If the issues are trivial then anyone should feel welcome to checkout the change and resubmit it using the same change ID to preserve original authorship. Core reviewers should not abandon such changes.
If a change has been abandoned either by a core reviewer, anyone can request the restoration of the patch by asking a core reviewer on IRC in #tripleo on freenode or by sending a request to the openstack-dev mailing list. Should the patch again become stale it may be abandoned again.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode