On Mon, 21 Oct 2013 11:02:57 +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > On 10/17/2013 05:19 AM, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote: > > I understand each one of us is busy with their life but a simple message would suffice to let know about the status. Is > > there a better way to address this concern to avoid repeating it in the future? > > Some numbers FYI: > * We have 117 sponsors right now. One problem here is that we need active sponsors for every special field of interest. Basically, every SIG, such as Java, OCaml, MinGW, ... > * This year 83 people have been sponsored. > * 191 people are waiting to be sponsored. Is the following page wrong? http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/NEEDSPONSOR.html > * Oldest request is from 2008(!) - but there are recent work on this BZ. Probably the same reasons as with the "normal" review requests. Sometimes reviews have stalled because of bundled libs, licensing troubles, missing deps, waiting for upstream. http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/NEW.html > * Oldest change on BZs waiting for sponsor is from 2010. Which ticket is that? Above page lists four tickets from 2011, but all have changed in 2013. > It would be nice if sponsors can sponsor at least one packager per year. That's mandatory already, although some sponsors don't agree with it: Proposal for revitalizing the packager sponsorship model https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/839 -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
