Hi, On Wednesday 16 April 2008 12:31:59 James Westby wrote: > On Wed, 2008-04-16 at 11:38 +0200, Stefan Potyra wrote: > > One argument against it raised in the past is, that this might lead to > > fewer people reviewing a package (or giving an ACK for a package), as > > they might be unsure about it. Actually, I believe that reviewing a > > package is actually a more difficult task then to create a new package > > from scratch, and so I think that this argument might still be true. > > > > As I've often cherrypicked reviews in the past (that is reviewed > > packages, which had one ACK already), and very often found issues with > > these, I fear that the package quality might get worse, and the rejection > > count from ubuntu-archive might increase. Now I wouldn't think, that I'm > > a so good reviewer, but rather that this is basically just, because > > different people spot different issues in packages. > > Hi, > > Do you think that this could perhaps be because some people don't > review the package as thoroughly as they know that someone else will > look at it first?
From my experience: No, I don't think that people were less thorough with a
review just because someone else would look at a package, but rather ...
>
> Increasing the quality of reviews is great, but just having a second
> reviewer doesn't necessarily guarantee that. As well as each reviewer
> knowing that someone else will look, the responsibility is diluted.
> If I were to miss something in a review when I was the only reviewer
> then it would be my omission, but with two reviewers both missed it, so
> it's not really one persons fault.
... yes, exactly.
Cheers,
Stefan.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
-- Ubuntu-motu mailing list Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
