On 10/27/2013 12:46 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Sun, 27 Oct 2013 01:54:44 +0000 (UTC), Ben Boeckel wrote:
I also wouldn't mind seeing a list of FE-NEEDSPONSOR bugs be emailed to
devel@ (similar to the ownership change email). Open reviews might be
nice as well, but maybe just FE-NEEDSPONSOR would be something to start
with.
http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/NEEDSPONSOR.html
[ http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/ ]
In the lists of new review requests, they are highlighted in green colour,
and the list is sorted by date.
Alternatively, add yourself to the Cc of the FE-NEEDSPONSOR tracker
ticket in bugzilla.
Or, email not all FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets but only those which are
deemed too old to be OK. An email message like that (not too often!)
would actually have a high signal/noise ratio, making all of us aware
what's happening when a newcomer is sitting in limbo. Which she should not.
Still remember the feeling sitting with a package waiting for a sponsor,
trying to follow the process but with absolutely no sponsor feedback. It
was *not* encouraging.
--alec
Well, there is FE-NEEDSPONSOR. Could we add a checkbox to this page[1]
for needing a sponsor? A new packager might not know about
FE-NEEDSPONSOR and getting it right up front would help, I'd think.
[1]https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Fedora&format=fedora-review
The detailed "Join" process description for new packagers mentions
FE-NEEDSPONSOR:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers#Create_Your_Review_Request
Making bugzilla forms more complex cannot replace documentation.
(We've had sponsored packagers requesting FE-NEEDSPONSOR for the package,
and the fedora-review flag's '?' state is confusing enough already.)
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
