Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459535 --- Comment #20 from Aurelien Bompard <gauret@xxxxxxx> 2009-01-11 09:12:32 EDT --- I don't want to pollute this bug with justifications, so I'm not going to go into further details. As I said, I believe both approaches are useful. > The list got so long because of the merge reviews and we are caching them now > because of the 'review with flags'-thing. Back in the days when we used > blocker bugs there it was not necessary to cache the pages. No-no, the list has always been huge, even before Fedora time. Now, with merge reviews, the list is just gigantic. The fact that the static pages were officially added only recently does not change the fact that we never found a way to cope efficiently with the amount of submissions. > If they get sloppy reviews, they are going to do sloppy packages. I don't agree with that. But hey, this discussion occurred many many times before on fedora-devel, and there always were these two sides. It's probably not going to change here and now. > Can you sponsor Guillaume afterwards? Sure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review