Readjusting SRU review process

[Adam Conrad]

On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 05:19:14PM +0200, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Brian Murray [2013-05-24  8:00 -0700]:
> > 
> > Having said that, I currently don't reject things because there is not a
> > good way to communicate the reason for rejection to the uploader.
> 
> Why is following up in the bug not a good way?

Following up in bugs is fine for SRUs, since they're all meant to be
tied to bugs anyway.  This isn't true for, say, things in the NEW
queue, however.

And, even in the SRU case, you might have an SRU that addresses 24
bugs: which one do you follow up on?  All 24?  The first in the list?
The one that seems most relevant to the problem you found with the
upload?

At any rate, I'm having StevenK work on getting Soyuz to allow for
a rejection comment, and from there, we can let the debate drop, since
we'll be able to do rejection comments or, if you prefer, you can
follow up to a bug, and have the rejection comment be:

 https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/foo/+bug/1234/comments/5

That should address use-cases in both directions, while allowing the
uploader to get a proper reject response with some information that
doesn't mean they need to hunt through all 24 linked bugs for their
excuse.

(And, while I usually do the "ping on IRC" thing myself, this is also
one thing that stops me from rejecting packages, as not everyone keeps
the same IRC hours as I do and, shockingly, some people are offline
when I try to contact them, async communication is definitely better
in this case).

... Adam