changing review requirements

[David Planella]

Al 01/11/12 12:46, En/na Allison Randal ha escrit:
> Hi all,
> 
> In the UDS session yesterday, we discussed a change to the review/voting
> requirements on apps, to help speed up the review process. In a
> nutshell, the proposal is:
> 
> - Instead of requiring three +1s from ARB members, we will require one
> technical +1 review from any Ubuntu Developer, and one compliance +1
> review from an ARB member.
> 

Thanks Allison for the summary and for bringing the discussion forward.

As a non-ARB member, but as someone who's been involved in the process,
I haven't had the chance to reply until now, as I'm still between
flights. Even now I'll have to be really quick but I'd like to add a
couple of comments:

One thing that is not captured in the first point is what is going to
happen with the app-review-contributors team. During the session [1] I
suggested making Ubuntu Developers be part of that team (in whichever
form fits best), so that app-review-contributors can continue helping
with reviews if they possess the technical skills even if they're not
Ubuntu Developers.

Having seen how other people helped with reviews during the contest as
part of the app-review-contributors team (even some participants
assisted in getting other participants' apps in!), I think it would be
really useful to keep that trend and let skilled non-ubuntu-devs also
contribute. What do you think?

Finally, having read Allison's e-mail to the TB, a quick note on the
resources that the Foundations and Security teams have committed to for
the 13.04 cycle: that is *some* of the sandboxing work and *some* of the
work on tooling (providing better support for /opt). From the
discussions, and looking at the work items from the session, they did
not commit to working on package checks tools, although as usual, I'm
sure they'll be happy to provide as much support and input as possible
to anyone working on them.

Cheers,
David.

> - When announcing this change, also make it publicly known that we're
> equally happy if Ubuntu Developers want to contribute by adopting apps
> from the ARB queue for universe+backports or debian-mentors. (Using
> their judgment picking out the apps that are substantial enough to make
> sense in universe or Debian.)
> 
> 
> For ARB members, does this match what you remember (if you were at the
> session), or does this sound reasonable (if you're following UDS
> remotely)? If you all agree, I'll take it to the Tech Board.
> 
> Allison
> 

[1] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/appdev-r-arb-review

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 551 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/app-review-board/attachments/20121103/9c7f95e9/attachment.pgp>