top posting, sorry..
What I find hard about reviewing is figuring out if a package is
actually under review or not. I see a metric shit load of comments,
suggestions and discussions on some FE-NEW submissions, but they remain
unassigned amd in FE-NEW.
Sometimes I will skip over a package simply becuase I don't know whats
going on. Some folks do the right thing and clearly state they are not
reviewing the package, which is great.
The package status script would not be able to help in these cases. If
people used bug blockers properly, then the script could help.
Michael
Patrice Dumas wrote:
Hello,
I have seen floating around the idea that there was a need for reviewers
for old reviews. So I started with the packages in FE-NEW with no activity
in eight weeks:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/PackageStatus?highlight=%28package%29#head-6ebf09953da14bdd17d75280dba5b4cffb941077-3
but I had a hard time to find a package really waiting for a review. In
the end I ended up looking at all of them, and here are the statistics
(I removed kmobiletools, accepted closed):
7 packages are stuck in review for various reasons
11 packages are stuck because they are waiting for submitters
10 packages were stuck with a need of a reviewer
So we have only 10 packages for 28 (about 1/3) that are really waiting
for a review. This makes searching for a really open review quite
painfull. So I think we should do something to be able to discriminate
the packages
* stuck for various reasons except needsponsor, including
because of packaging guidelines blocking the review like recently some
php reviews.
* the packages stuck because the submitter has to take an action
but hasn't moved for, say, one month.
* leave the other packages under review as is.
a possible proposal could be along blocking special bugs that would
change the background color in the trees like
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/showdependencytree.cgi?id=FE-NEW&hide_resolved=1
to a given color. These colors could take precedence over the status
(like NEW, ASSIGNED...). It would be nice if it could also be seen on
top of the bugreport, but if it is only in
Bug xxxxx blocks FE-SUBMITTER-ASLEEP FE-NEW
it would be right too.
I don't think it should be a must, but something nice to have. some
members of the fedora QA team, or anybody else, could for example look
from time to time on old reviews and make the blocks.
I don't care about that proposal, it is just an idea thrown, it might
not be feasible, but I think something should be done to help find
where reviewer can really act.
Lastly, there could be a procedure for AWOL/MIA submitters similar than
the one for AWOL/MIA maintainers, to allow submitters to replace
AWOL/MIA submitters and restart a review. This is allready done on a
case by case basis, but I think a policy wouldn't hurt here, and having
a classification of review stuck by submitter could help to find the
AWOL/MIA submitters.
Here are the details if you don't trust my numbers :)
Review stuck 6:
disagreament:
fnord freedt
licence issue:
acx-kmod acx-kmod-common
wondering about whether it is a good idea to include in extras or not:
alsa-oss phpBB
needsponsor 1:
gq
waiting for submitter 11:
smixer smokeping sparse gitweb mondo lurker libpri magic socat
fxload kdiff3
Waiting for review 10:
xmms-musepack transconnect ardour pyscript Wcl linux-wlan-ng gpc
vdr-osdteletext vdr-subtitles sqlgrey
--
Pat
--
fedora-extras-list mailing list
fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
