)]}'
{"/COMMIT_MSG":[{"author":{"_account_id":4146,"name":"Clark Boylan","email":"cboylan@sapwetik.org","username":"cboylan"},"change_message_id":"61bbe968865c95c050ae0cfae9f5fdf963257bf0","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":6,"context_line":""},{"line_number":7,"context_line":"Add code review templates appendix"},{"line_number":8,"context_line":""},{"line_number":9,"context_line":"This adds a code review templates appendix to the contributor guide."},{"line_number":10,"context_line":"Attempt to give reviewers some guidance on what the goals are and how to"},{"line_number":11,"context_line":"achive them through the use of templates that can be reused when they"},{"line_number":12,"context_line":"review code."}],"source_content_type":"text/x-gerrit-commit-message","patch_set":1,"id":"c3f0cd09_210666b1","line":9,"range":{"start_line":9,"start_character":49,"end_line":9,"end_character":67},"updated":"2026-08-28 17:40:53.000000000","message":"I ported this over from a change that originally went to the contributor guide and missed that this could be cleaned up as well. I don\u0027t think it is a huge deal, but if we want to fix it I can do so or feel free to push a new patchset to edit it.","commit_id":"f29257f3fdcbd9359538bd0478f86d687ca27111"}],"/PATCHSET_LEVEL":[{"author":{"_account_id":13252,"name":"Dr. Jens Harbott","display_name":"Jens Harbott (frickler)","email":"frickler@offenerstapel.de","username":"jrosenboom"},"change_message_id":"abf12c7c74c46b1de6ee64a21d5bcd912c85a766","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":1,"id":"eed87583_0642add5","updated":"2026-08-29 08:10:39.000000000","message":"I have mixed feelings about this change in general. Improving the usefulness of reviews for contributors sure is good, but for me as reviewer, seeing the bar for the quality and verboseness of reviews getting raised, the immediate reaction is \"ok, then I\u0027ll do even less reviews\" and I\u0027m not sure yet how to deal with that\n\nthere is also some risk IMO that if reviews look very much template-like, they could get mistaken for AI reviews, especially if people are doing agent based reviews which would likely start to take up the wording from these templates in their responses. and it also doesn\u0027t seem very useful to me to see the same \"approved\" template getting posted on my 100th patch getting merged. so maybe include some guidance to mainly use these templates on changes from new contributors? which of course adds even more load on reviewers then with the task of recognizing those","commit_id":"f29257f3fdcbd9359538bd0478f86d687ca27111"},{"author":{"_account_id":4146,"name":"Clark Boylan","email":"cboylan@sapwetik.org","username":"cboylan"},"change_message_id":"bca67e84d11a965f11aa2eafc349e030958bbfdc","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":1,"id":"2c895548_f4df9bb1","in_reply_to":"eed87583_0642add5","updated":"2026-09-01 21:24:26.000000000","message":"\u003e I have mixed feelings about this change in general. Improving the usefulness of reviews for contributors sure is good, but for me as reviewer, seeing the bar for the quality and verboseness of reviews getting raised, the immediate reaction is \"ok, then I\u0027ll do even less reviews\" and I\u0027m not sure yet how to deal with that\n\u003e \n\nI don\u0027t think the intention is to make people feel like they have to work harder for each review. The VMT [0], election [1], and release [2] teams all use templates for work they perform to reduce the overhead on people doing the work. Instead the idea here is to provide additional tools to aid reviewers in writing effective reviews and reduce the burden overall.\n\n\u003e there is also some risk IMO that if reviews look very much template-like, they could get mistaken for AI reviews, especially if people are doing agent based reviews which would likely start to take up the wording from these templates in their responses. and it also doesn\u0027t seem very useful to me to see the same \"approved\" template getting posted on my 100th patch getting merged. so maybe include some guidance to mainly use these templates on changes from new contributors? which of course adds even more load on reviewers then with the task of recognizing those\n\nWe do already have a number of consistent comments in the system `Uploaded patchset X`, `Build succeeded`, `Build failed`, `Starting gate jobs`, `Change has been successfully merged` and probably others. These convey useful information in a consistent manner. I think that is the primary goal here: make it easy for people to convey critical information to contributors. As with the existing comments that use consistent messaging I expect that regular contributors will learn that they are part of the system and less frequent contributors will hopefully find the provided information to be valuable in determining what the next steps in the process are.\n\nI do agree that this may come off as impersonal, but maybe that is a trade off we\u0027re willing to make if it ensures that people working within the system more consistently get the information they need?\n\n[0] https://security.openstack.org/vmt-process.html#templates\n[1] https://opendev.org/openstack/election/src/branch/master/openstack_election/templates\n[2] https://releases.openstack.org/reference/process.html","commit_id":"f29257f3fdcbd9359538bd0478f86d687ca27111"}],"doc/source/appendices/code-review-templates.rst":[{"author":{"_account_id":13252,"name":"Dr. Jens Harbott","display_name":"Jens Harbott (frickler)","email":"frickler@offenerstapel.de","username":"jrosenboom"},"change_message_id":"abf12c7c74c46b1de6ee64a21d5bcd912c85a766","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":171,"context_line":"   Weekly Team Meeting: OFTC #[CHANNEL_NAME] at [UTC TIME] [DAY]"},{"line_number":172,"context_line":""},{"line_number":173,"context_line":"   As your change goes through the review process, please remember to treat"},{"line_number":174,"context_line":"   maintainers and fellow contributors with respect."}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":1,"id":"f86aca2f_e99a8f93","line":174,"updated":"2026-08-29 08:10:39.000000000","message":"Just as a suggestion: One further template could be useful, targeting reviews with CI failures. It could explain how to check logs for issues, but also mention that sometimes failures are unrelated to the submitted change","commit_id":"f29257f3fdcbd9359538bd0478f86d687ca27111"},{"author":{"_account_id":4146,"name":"Clark Boylan","email":"cboylan@sapwetik.org","username":"cboylan"},"change_message_id":"bca67e84d11a965f11aa2eafc349e030958bbfdc","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":171,"context_line":"   Weekly Team Meeting: OFTC #[CHANNEL_NAME] at [UTC TIME] [DAY]"},{"line_number":172,"context_line":""},{"line_number":173,"context_line":"   As your change goes through the review process, please remember to treat"},{"line_number":174,"context_line":"   maintainers and fellow contributors with respect."}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":1,"id":"70aac77f_74a54575","line":174,"in_reply_to":"f86aca2f_e99a8f93","updated":"2026-09-01 21:24:26.000000000","message":"This is a good idea. Reviewers may not be willing or able to properly review a change while the CI failures are occurring, but those reviewers can point contributors towards a path that hopefully leads to happy CI and proper code review.\n\nThat said, maybe we hold off on adding that for when there is general consensus around this change. I want to avoid adding more templates if we\u0027re still debating whether we should add the existing templates. I\u0027m happy to followup in a new patchset or a child change once there is consensus to add this additional template.","commit_id":"f29257f3fdcbd9359538bd0478f86d687ca27111"}]}