Lionel Le Folgoc wrote: > On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 13:35:15 +0200, Gauvain Pocentek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > >> Hello MOTUs and MOTU hopefuls, >> >> As you certainly noticed, the list of packages waiting on REVU is >> really, really long. I've reviewed a few and the update to gutsy is >> needed for all of them (only a one line change in the changelog, but >> needed). It'd be nice if people having packages on REVU could update >> the distro target. >> >> Also, a lot of packages have been commented by reviewers but not updated >> by the uploaders. Could we define some kind of policy about what we >> should do with this packages? My guess is that we should mail the >> uploader directly (not only a message on REVU or on this list) to ask >> him what he intends to do with the package. This would allow us to clean >> the list, and other packagers to grab the package and finish it if the >> initial packager don't want / can't work on the package anymore. >> >> Thoughts? >> >> Cheers, >> Gauvain >> >> -- >> Ubuntu-motu mailing list >> [email protected] >> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: >> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu >> > > Hi, > > I think this is a good idea. > > But IMO, it raises some important questions, and since we're at the > beginning of a new development cycle, it is the good time to try to > answer them, to keep on improving us and Universe. > > I read some comments on bug reports[1], which made me think that > something isn't going well, and we should try to find why and how fix > it. And the thing to blame isn't 'miscommunication'. > > Yes, everyone will agree, the packages list waiting on REVU is huge, and > I believe there is an issue in both MOTUs and people proposing packages. > > > * First, why are there so few reviewers? > > That's not definitely because a lack of MOTU (65 members of ~motu) > I really wonder why so few MOTUs are reviewing on REVU. Here are some > possible answers: > > - core-dev: some MOTUs are also core-dev, so they are very busy, > dealing with main packages. > > - "debian-way-of-thinking" (that's not pejorative): some MOTUs take > care of their own packages *only* (that's not the way I see this task, > and I am pretty sure you agree). > > - too busy to review: making statistics, rebuilds of the whole archive > and all this kind of tasks is useful, but not essential. It won't > fix nor review issues/packages. > > - knowledge issue: reviewing is hard, and reasonably, no one can know > all packaging policies. I think that many MOTUs don't 'dare' to review > package, because they think it'll call into question their packaging > knowledge. > > > * Then, why are there so many packages waiting on REVU? > > (I've just spoken of the lack of reviewers above, so I won't speak about > it again.) > > IMO, many packagers upload their packages to REVU, and think that's > done, and their packages are going to get into Universe. I don't know if > it is a miscommunication or a lack of motivation, but actually, very > few people come on #ubuntu-motu to "prevent MOTUs from sleeping until > they have reviewed their packages". This is worse during REVU days: many > packages are reviewed, but few are updated by packagers within the "time > frame" (i.e. before the end of these REVU days). > > > * So, how can we improve this? > > I think the REVU/wiki page has to be updated, to explicitely say: > "When-you-upload-a-package-go-on-#ubuntu-motu-and-cry-and-yell-until-you-get-a-MOTU-to-review-it". > > Besides, we need a better tracking for proposed packages. The > motu-reviewers mailing list has a 'too high traffic' to manage this > efficiently. When I review a package, I need to keep the name/address > and check incoming mail to see if it hasn't been updated. > I think we can use LP for this. For instance, if a bug report is filed > for each new package uploaded on REVU, it would be easier to see if a > MOTU isn't already reviewing it. As we did with the 'needs-packaging' > tag, we could set up a tag which indicates a package needs to be reviewed. > > Finally, I think that it'll only need a little effort if everyone is > involving ; no specification - even well written -, no statistic - even > very precise - is going to be the miracle-fix for the 5 problematic > points explained above. > > Thoughts on this? > > Cheers, > Lionel > > [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/104654/comments/2 > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/vdrift-data/+bug/106854/comments/ Lionel,
I agree with much of what you are saying. However, your comment about a lack of resources not being an issue is false I believe. Yes, there are 65 MOTUs listed but how many of them are actually active? We tend to go through cycles where people have higher and lower levels of involvement. That includes myself as well. I try to REVU when I can but when my real-life workload gets high and I still have other stuff going on with Ubuntu, REVU drops in the priority list. My own personal opinion is that we don't even have the resources to take on what we have much less adding hundreds and hundreds of new packages. The other issue is that there are no "standards" for the packages on REVU. Much of the stuff on there is cruft and I don't even see the benefit of bringing some of it in. Yeah it's nice that Joe User can get his or her package in the repo's but does it really benefit Ubuntu? I also tend to see a lot of upload it and forget it as Guavain somewhat pointed out to start with. Several packages have been sitting out there and we have made comments and in certain instances I have even mailed the uploader with no response. I realize that some of that may be frustration on the uploaders part but again, we aren't miracle workers. Just my 2 worthless cents. Thanks, Barry (aka bddebian) -- Ubuntu-motu mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
