MOTU Meeting Minutes for 2009-01-30

[Morten Kjeldgaard]

Hi,

> == Discussion about REVU ==
>
> Morten Kjeldgaard raised a proposal to improve REVU workflow [1]. With
> this new approach, packages uploaded to REVU would fall into four
> categories depending on reviewers' actions (need-work comments or
> advocations). It could also be possible to inhibit new uploads to REVU
> at a choosen time (i.e. after FeatureFreeze), but Nathan Handler and
> Emmet Hikory put some objections about this feature.
>
> Discussion was taken to describe the new display method for REVU
> packages, Nathan Handler and Emmet Hikory argued about the real
> usefulness of the new interface, especially because of the  
> notification
> feature already implemented in REVU (interested parties can  
> subscribe to
> a given package to receive updates about a package status). After a
> short discussion, there was no consensus about the proposed workflow
> because there is not a clear idea of the benefits of it. Luca  
> Falavigna
> proposed to set up a staging REVU server to familiarize with the new
> display method to see how it performs and if there is room for  
> improvements.

Following up on last MOTU meeting, I have set up a mock-up site  
displaying the revised REVU workflow [1]. The original proposal is  
available on the wiki [2].

Please note, that most functionality that you know and love from REVU  
is not working correctly, in part because my server does not have a  
copy of the 48 Gb source package upload data that is hosted on the  
real REVU site ;-)

What *should* be working is the links at the top labelled:

Package rung: Unreviewed | In Progress | Advocated | Upload | Archived  
Packages

These links lead to pages that are in different stages ("rungs")  of  
reviewing.

The listings are a bit different from what you are used to, there are  
columns listing the total number of comments and the number of days  
since upload. This is *not* a part of the proposal; I have merely  
played around with data that I thought was useful in gauging the  
activity of each package.

In any case, I hope the mockup site will help you see how the proposed  
workflow will look in practice!

I am grateful to Siegfried Gevatter (RainCT) for his patience with all  
my stupid questions concerning the revu code!

Cheers,
Morten

[1] http://dmz-212.daimi.au.dk/~mok/revu/
[2] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/REVUWorkflowProposal