Sankarshan (সঙ্কর্ষণ) wrote:
Debarshi Ray wrote:
I think we should take this to the main [EMAIL PROTECTED]
list and let others also join in. This is important because the people
associated with fedora-qa are usually there.
And I'd rather have some working code to facilitate a discussion that
has an objective rather than discussing for discussion's sake.
True but there is value in gather ideas beyond what we have already
thought about since the concern about the long review queue is a ongoing
thing. FESCo mentioned review-o-matic briefly recently as well
http://bpepple.fedorapeople.org/fesco/FESCo-2008-10-15.html
Apparently, people are still filing several new review requests each day
and despite getting half a dozen new packages, every single day in
rawhide, our package review queue is not reducing considerably.
Review-o-matic can potentially take away the grunt work from the review
process leaving reviewers to concentrate on the more interesting parts
which requires human contextual intelligence. This probably will attract
more reviews knowing that they don't have to do the boring parts.
Even without this review tool, I think that package maintainers should
be doing more reviews in comparison to maintaining more packages at this
point. With the new uberpackager process in place, sponsors hopefully
won't be a bottle neck as much.
Rahul
_______________________________________________
Fedora-india mailing list
Fedora-india@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-india
