One of the big questions I had when I started writing patches was who I should ask to review them. Now that I’ve been in the community for a while, I’ve got a much better sense of who I should be talking to for the type of things I’m likely to write, but there are still times when I want to make a change in a part of the code that I haven’t touched before, and I’m not sure who to ask. In those cases, I usually fall back to a fairly simple (if non-obvious) set of steps to try and figure out who to pick.
- Get the list of files I’ve changed.
- Get the hg log for those files.
- Check through the log for “r=”, and “sr=”.
Of course, that’s a fairly easy set of steps to automate, and so I present my first cut at the automated reviewer chooser!
Of course, there are a lot of things I’ld like to do with this, such as:
- Improving the documentation.
- Checking to see how well this script would have done on previous commits.
- Taking into account the length of the queues for the reviewers.
- Adding some sort of recent-ness calculations.
But I think that this tool is useful enough in its current state that releasing it and getting feedback on what to actually work on would be a win.
To use it, be in a mercurial source repo, and type
getReviewer.py to get
a list of suggested reviewers for the current differences, or
getReviewer.py temp.diff or
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi\?id\=536017 to specify a
different set of changes.