Re: Improvments for NVMeOF dissector

[Pascal Quantin <pascal () wireshark org>]

Hi Constantine,

If I read the review history correctly, you were asked to perform some changes that you did 2 days ago. This is not 
abnormal not to get any feedback in such a short period, and that does not mean the receiver lost interest but simply 
that he is busy.
So my suggestion is to be a bit more patient as reviewers usually do their best according to the time they can give to 
the project. Being too pushy can give the exact opposite of what you would like. Just my two cents.

Best regards,
Pascal.

21 mars 2021 10:47:02 Constantine Gavrilov <CONSTG () il ibm com>:

> Sometime ago, I started to work on NVMEoF dissector. I have already contributed the number of fixes and improvements 
> and they have already been merged.
>
> My goal is to have a full dissection for connection establishment, management and IO flow, and I would like to move 
> on quickly.
>
> The goal is to contribute back to the community. I am not seeking recognition -- I have plenty of that in my place of 
> work. The goal is to help and express my gratitude to the project.
>
> After initial changes merged, I am stuck at getting my current merge request 
> (_#17282[/wireshark/wireshark/-/issues/17282]_)reviewed. I understand that this is a volunteer project and all people 
> are busy. But I do have a problem with broken line of communication. My personal opinion is that if a core developer 
> "picks up" the merge request and has review comments, they shall follow up on the requested changes that a 
> contributor has provided. If they loose focus or interest, they shall inform the contributor, instead of just 
> "disappearing".  As a contributor,  I can control any form of merge request assignment or have control over who will 
> look at the merge request.
>
> The fact that people are busy goes both ways -- for contributors as well as core developers. I am looking into 
> improving my contribution experience for NVMEoF. Perhaps there is a core developer who is willing to look at the 
> changes and has sufficient interest and available time to work with me on reviewing NVMEoF dissector changes? As it 
> stands now, I feel blocked from contributing (just because the speed of the review and people dropping off). I am 
> busy and will eventually have hard choices to make...
>
> Perhaps I can get approval to join core developers?
>
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------
> Constantine Gavrilov
> Storage Architect
> Master Inventor
> Tel-Aviv Storage Lab IDT Lead
> Tel-Aviv IBM Storage Lab
> 1 Azrieli Center, Tel-Aviv
> ----------------------------------------
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
> Archives:    https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
> Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
>              mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
Archives:    https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe