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. >
Indeed, I'm one of those, and I have not been able to work as much as I would on universe during feisty dev cycle. > - "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). > I agree with this. I know that all the MOTUs are volunteers and we cannot ask people to work on things they don't want to touch. It's nice to have specific teams, but this also means that "general work" (reviews, bug fixes/triaging...) isn't done as well as it could be. > - 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. > I've often seen MOTUs writting that they won't review because they don't feel confortable enough. This shouldn't happen! If you've been granted upload rights, it means that you're able to review as well. being a MOTU doesn't mean that you know everything (i've learnt a lot while reviewing). IIRC raphink started a review guide. Could we improve it, and maybe have an review MOTU school session? > * 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". > I definitely agree with this. Just uploading a package to REVU is not enough, we should clearly document that. > 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. > We need an easy way to track the state of a package. Bugs on LP, to which we (each developer) could be suscribed would certainly help. Cheers, Gauvain > 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/2 > > > -- Ubuntu-motu mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
