Request For Candidates: Application Review Board

[Luke Faraone]

On 08/13/2010 07:06 PM, Rick Spencer wrote:
> For your #2, it seems that the pressure for more reviewers will come if
> there are more apps to be reviewed. I'm not clear on why the apps being
> bound for one repository or another will significantly change that
> equation, but I'll take your word for it.

I think the issue William was trying to bring up is that we'll be
splitting reviews across two different locations, thus requiring
reviewers to either:

 A) follow both sites, and now I have two places to check
 B) choose one, and now there's one less potential reviewer for the
other site

>> Backports.
> I don't actually recall why backports wasn't chosen for the repository.
> I remember that it was discussed in some detail, though.

Backports is appropriate for when a package is already in the next
Development release. This would involve a change in what backports  means.

-- 
╒═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╕
│Luke Faraone                          ╭Debian / Ubuntu Developer╮│
│http://luke.faraone.cc                ╰Sugar Labs, Systems Admin╯│
│PGP: 5189 2A7D 16D0 49BB 046B  DC77 9732 5DD8 F9FD D506          │
╘═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╛

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20100813/8847dbd9/attachment.pgp