Role of the Sponsorship Queue

Emmet Hikory persia at ubuntu.com
Wed Mar 3 05:52:46 GMT 2010


Daniel Chen wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 8:50 AM, Daniel Holbach wrote:
>> The distinction is important because "including contributed fixes" would
>> require developers to check various lists for input and probably treat
>> them differently ("can you update patch to do XYZ in a special way?" vs
>> "I modified your patch and uploaded it."), etc.
>
> Are we leaning toward removing the developer requirement for review,
> e.g., REVU allows comments from non-Ubuntu uploaders?

    REVU currently allows comments from non-Ubuntu uploaders
(allthough it does require a LP account), it just doesn't allow
advocations.  If this isn't the correct behaviour, it's not that hard
to change, but I'm not sure that changes to REVU need to affect
changes to sponsoring (unless we decide to do all sponsoring through
REVU (or similar), for which there are good arguments (some changes
can't be expressed as a diff (e.g. native vs. non-native), sponsorship
requests are often not really bugs, so clog the bugtracker, etc.).

-- 
Emmet HIKORY



More information about the ubuntu-devel mailing list