On Friday, February 4, 2022 4:00:44 AM EST Philip Hands wrote: > Scott Kitterman <deb...@kitterman.com> writes: > > ... > > > My impression is that people are tired of waiting on New, but no one > > really seems to be interested in doing any work on any alternative > > other than more bugs. > > Part of the problem is that New processing is a bit of a black box, so > it's not clear to those of us outside the team how we could help. > > (or at least, not clear to me -- links welcome). > > As a random example, I noticed John Goerzen's post[1] about Yggdrasil on > planet.d.o last month. John has since uploaded a package. > > As I write it's still in New[2], which is no great shock, as it's only > been a couple of weeks. > > I'm quite keen to give it a spin. > > So, what can we do with that enthusiasm: > > I could grab the source and build it locally. > > I could squander my enthusiasm by waiting for New. > > I could complain about not being able to download from New, and if if > the FTP team listened to me, the enthusiasm would immediately become > unavailable to others, as I'd not be feeling frustrated any more. > > If I knew how to do it, and there were some obvious method, I could > contribute to reviewing the package I want to see in the archive. > > On reflection, I think that removing the bottle-neck of New would be a > mistake, as it would the remove the itch we all want to scratch. > > Instead please just provide us with the ability to scratch that itch and > you may find that you suddenly have quite a few more volunteers. > > In the example above, eventually I will get sufficiently bored of > waiting to build the package myself, which will probably be rather more > effort than reviewing it would have been, so I'd much rather be able to > apply that effort in a way that benefits more than just me.
I think that all makes sense. Currently the only answer is join the FTP Team as a trainee when there is a call for volunteers. I totally get the frustration. I'm not sure how much value there is in drive-by reviews as a general case. I suppose if external reviews were done it could identify reject cases that would mean the FTP Team could spend more time on packages that might be accepted. I don't expect an external review that said "It's fine, recommend you accept it" would cause any FTP Team member to blindly accept the package. I'll consider if there's not perhaps some middle ground so that we can see if there are enough volunteers to make a dent in things. Scott K
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
