On 08/05/2016 10:31 AM, Parag Nemade wrote: >> b) fedora-review is run automatically by some bot/script just after review >> have been submitted. > > Can a new utility be written for this as I don't think that long > fedora-review output is helpful? Most checks have no markings in them. > How can it be helpful to package submitter?
You can configure which fedora-review checks are ran, for example exclude any non-automated checks. >> c) Create wiki page with list of sponsors willing to accept new sponsoree. >> And list area of expertise of sponsors (e.g. java, python, IoT...). This >> will make for sponsoree easier to find right sponsor. Because we have some >> sponsors, who are active but are not willing to accept new sponsoree right >> now. > > This can be in addition to above, Why not run a script frequently and > check bugzilla and based on common naming CC the related SIG group? > e.g. if a package review is submitted whose name contains python then > add cc python SIG group that will notify actual group people and > someone can find interest and review the package. I know this is in > general suggestion but I suppose every SIG is also having some > Sponsors who can sponsor new contributor packages. This won't work for all SIGs. For example, Java packages don't have any common naming scheme. If you just search for "Java" in review requests, almost all results will be false-positives (eg. from "JavaScript") and you won't find most of relevant reviews this way. I think that wiki page could work for this purpose. -- Mikolaj Izdebski Software Engineer, Red Hat IRC: mizdebsk -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
