https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=840551 --- Comment #40 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> --- Somehow I got CC'd on this. I'm not really sure why, but a couple of points: 1) I've been on vacation for a month. For longer the lifetime of this package. I'm not really back to reviewing packages yet. 2) I don't know anything about sugar, so I'm not sure there's much I can do. I prefer to stick to things I understand when sponsoring new contributors. There was a sugar package from a different contributor where I offered to sponsor if I could get a sugar expert to join in, and couldn't even get that. To me it seems like this is a failing with the sugar community, not really the package review process. It's true we have a number of waiting packages, but the number is pretty much stable. Besides, this one isn't really even that old so I'm not sure what's up with the grumbling. If someone's going to pay for reviewers, that's great, but some of us have been reviewing a large number of packages for years without compensation and I don't really think money would help the process. Finally, I personally dispensed with requiring people to review other packages in order to receive sponsorship some time ago. Sometimes it makes sense, sometimes it doesn't. But each sponsor is allowed to sponsor according to their own personal beliefs, so I'm certainly not going to say that my way is somehow better. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review