CCing fedora-advisory-board On 14.11.2007 13:36, Mamoru Tasaka wrote: > Neal Becker wrote, at 11/14/2007 09:01 PM +9:00: >> I've seen no response to: >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=373621 >> Did I do something wrong, or is everyone busy? > Please be patient. Currently there are about 270 review requests > which are not assigned to anybody. And 1108 open reviews in total (including lots of merge reviews (¹)) according to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/InProgressReviewRequests which redirects to https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&short_desc_type=allwordssubstr&short_desc=&product=Fedora&component=Package+Review&query_format=advanced&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=FAILS_QA&bug_status=MODIFIED&bug_status=NEEDINFO&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ON_DEV&bug_status=ON_QA&bug_status=PASSES_QA&bug_status=POST&bug_status=RELEASE_PENDING&bug_status=VERIFIED&long_desc_type=substring&long_desc=&bug_file_loc_type=allwordssubstr&bug_file_loc=&status_whiteboard_type=allwordssubstr&status_whiteboard=&fixed_in_type=allwordssubstr&fixed_in=&qa_whiteboard_type=allwordssubstr&qa_whiteboard=&keywords_type=allwords&keywords=&emailassigned_to1=1&emailtype1=exact&email1=&emailassigned_to2=1&emailreporter2=1&emailqa_contact2=1&emailcc2=1&emailtype2=exact&email2=&bugidtype=include&bug_id=&votes=&changedin=&chfieldfrom=&chfieldto=Now&chfieldvalue=&cmdtype=doit&order=Reuse+same+sort+as+last+time&field0-0-0=flagtypes.name&type0-0-0=notsubstring&value0-0-0=fedora-review%2B&f ield0-1-0=bug_id&type0-1-0=notregexp&value0-1-0=%5E163776%24&field0-2-0=bug_id&type0-2-0=notregexp&value0-2-0=%5E163778%24&field0-3-0=bug_id&type0-3-0=notregexp&value0-3-0=%5E163779%24&field0-4-0=bug_id&type0-4-0=notregexp&value0-4-0=%5E177841%24 Some of them are quite old. And the list of course doesn't include those bugs that got closed as the packager lost interest over time. I think we have a problem here. I'm actually wondering what FESCo (and the Board) thinks about that. Or, to look at the big picture: During the Extras days FESCo would have taken care of something like that months ago. IIRC FESCo constantly tried to improve the workflow for reviewers and packagers to make their life easier, Extras better and everyone happy. And there were new sponsors nominated and accepted every few weeks to make sure the number of sponsors grows in parallel with the number of packagers/packages.. Both things seem to get lost during the merge(²). FESCo got lots of new things to take care of. It seems to me most of the things it took care of in the past fell of the table and nobody really takes care of them anymore these days. Or, let's say it different way: In the Extras-days FESCo made sure contributers stayed happy while we grew. These days FESCo mainly makes sure we get a distribution out every 6 months. Is this what we wanted when we designed the current governing model? I don't think so. Is it bad? Yes, I think it is, that's why I wrote this mail. Why do you think it's bad? Because I more and more often hear in private that contributers are unhappy. I also got the impression that people are more and more unwilling to participate in discussions and on lists. And there are no new leaders emerging in FESCo/packaging-land (the low number of people that volunteered during the FESCo election is one reasons for this opinion; or look at FPC -- according to the wiki the same people since one year; there is also next-to no interest by non-committee-members in participating in the meetings). What do you suggest? I'm not sure; some random ideas: Get barriers out of the way. Maybe redefine the governing model again and merge FESCo and the Board. Lower the importances of the committees -- make them coordinate and not dominate. Make reviewing easier and help people with exchanging reviews while making sure we get new sponsors. Move over to a slightly more wiki-style approach for the packages and make sure contributers are happy. Cu knurd (¹) -- can't remember, but wasn't it a unwritten (or even written?) goal to get all Core packages reviewed by F8? (²) -- does anybody know how many new sponsors we got since F7? -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
