Queue review proposals

[Stéphane Graber]

On 02/06/2012 06:33 PM, Jono Bacon wrote:
> On 6 February 2012 09:30, Allison Randal<allison at lohutok.net>  wrote:
>> On 02/05/2012 11:38 AM, David Planella wrote:
>>>> Last night I spent a couple of hours looking through all apps in the
>>>> queue and wrote a report [1] that I hope can be helpful as a first-pass
>>>> review. I looked at all of the apps pending review, wrote some comments
>>>> and recommendations on the next actions to take.
>>
>> Thanks for this.
>>
>>>> I think it might be a good idea to distribute the work to cut down the
>>>> queue by assigning reviewers to each package. Having looked at the queue
>>>> in detail, I'm sure we can manage to reduce the queue to a manageable
>>>> size and get some of these cool apps into extras by the end of next week.
>>
>> We tried assigning reviewers in the first year of the ARB, and it didn't
>> work. It just meant that reviews completely blocked when the assigned
>> reviewer didn't have time, and no one else felt they could pick up the
>> app and see it through.
>>
>> I'll suggest an alternative, which is that we each post to the mailing
>> list with running updates on whatever apps we look at or work on and
>> what we do. That way, we're all aware of the current status of
>> submissions, and what needs to be done next.
>
> While I agree with the idea of blockers on certain packages, I also
> think this might become a blocker too.
>
> I would instead recommend that the ARB picks a set of apps each week
> and sees those apps through to completion. The problem we have right
> now is that there are a stack of half-reviewed apps and David's goal
> of the report is to bring visibility on those statuses to get them
> over the hump.
>
>>>> - Sync up next Friday or any other suitable day next week on a 'Queue
>>>> Review Status' meeting
>>
>> I'd be happy to sync on Fridays, during the review shifts seems to make
>> sense. But, if it comes to a choice between spending time working on
>> apps, and spending time talking about apps, the first is more important.
>
> Totally agree!
>
>> I'd rather see a commitment to spend an hour a week (anytime during the
>> week) working on apps with an update sent to the mailing list, than a
>> commitment to spend an hour a week (all at the same time) on IRC.
>
> So how about if there is a short meeting to pick the apps for the week
> and then the ARB focuses on driving one of the following outcomes:
>
>   * Approval
>   * Rejection
>   * Needs Information
>
> If there is a Needs Information I would recommend that the item stays
> on the list to keep the urgency of the app in everyone's minds.
>
>     Jono
>

With Feature Freeze right around the corner and a huge list of installer 
bugs to deal with, I won't be committing to spend any time on ARB 
reviews for the next month or so.

I may be doing early cleanup (needs information/reject) when I see new 
stuff popping up in the queue but that's probably going to be about it.

-- 
Stéphane Graber
Ubuntu developer
http://www.ubuntu.com