Re: Improvments for NVMeOF dissector

["Constantine Gavrilov" <CONSTG () il ibm com>]

Pascal, thank you for your answer.

What would be a reasonable time to wait? A week, two weeks, a month? Long 
review times a problem by themselves, since I cannot move ahead. But it is 
not even a problem of waiting as much, as it is a problem of communication 
loss. Dropping a line " will review it within 3 weeks" or "cannot handle 
it, too busy" "or will review later" is far less problematic then ignoring 
the question "can you review it, please?"


I have nothing personal to gain from this. It is true that I am using 
wireshark for my work on NVMEoF, but if I cannot interest the community 
with this work, I can fork the tree locally and continue without 
submitting the changes. Doing this for community was an act of contibution 
and a hard work, but I will not impose if there is no cooperation. As I 
have said, I do not think recognition. If there is an interest and someone 
will come up to reveiew the changes, than I continue to contibute. If the 
attitude is "do not bother us", why should I care?


--
----------------------------------------
Constantine Gavrilov
Storage Architect
Master Inventor
Tel-Aviv Storage Lab IDT Lead
Tel-Aviv IBM Storage Lab
1 Azrieli Center, Tel-Aviv
Phone: +972-3-6897318 
Fax:      +972-3-6897230
----------------------------------------



From:   Pascal Quantin <pascal () wireshark org>
To:     Developer support list for Wireshark <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
Date:   03/21/2021 12:02 PM
Subject:        [EXTERNAL] Re: [Wireshark-dev] Improvments for NVMeOF 
dissector
Sent by:        "Wireshark-dev" <wireshark-dev-bounces () 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 
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)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://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.wireshark.org_lists_wireshark-2Ddev&d=DwIGaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=XzHrT4jzZ2lsSkPL8XE51gcxM30kcdBgWfG2QV6bUpw&m=Pm_WNGTMDJaxPl3pTqYwOTZbE8nLo6Gj17vih_olCHI&s=Ny-xFzcNeX-gmDmEJffp5ViSSqcpcwY20i-ucIZkfsM&e=
 

Unsubscribe: 
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.wireshark.org_mailman_options_wireshark-2Ddev&d=DwIGaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=XzHrT4jzZ2lsSkPL8XE51gcxM30kcdBgWfG2QV6bUpw&m=Pm_WNGTMDJaxPl3pTqYwOTZbE8nLo6Gj17vih_olCHI&s=ERRL9XIUdCMm1gTsUIesNYxjrpJfQn6aofoIV_QnZSo&e=
 

             
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