On 01/22/2015 07:15 PM, Haïkel wrote:
2015-01-21 11:49 GMT+01:00 Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos
> Step 6: ... If the proposed package is not reviewed for 2 months, the
> package must be reviewed by the submitter, and a git module with the
> master branch will be approved.
I share your concern about the pending list but self-review is not
Just licensing review itself would be a blocker to your proposal.
But if we were to have a staging repository as suggested by Josh and
it could be something that we could consider.
What saddens me is that we have plenty of packagers and sponsors and only
a very small fraction does review.
We should find a way to encourage people doing review even *INFORMAL*
Good informal reviews is the best way to get sponsored, and helps
the pile (as a sponsor, I approve a positive and good quality
review by my mentees).
Besides, some submitters do not try hard enough to find reviewers:
* some reviews do not provide usable links to spec and srpm breaking
semi-automated reviewing tool. The more information you give to the
the more likely it will get reviewed fast.
* reviews swapping: 376 pending reviews but how many swapping requests
on this list ?
* Just go asking your fellow packagers on irc/mail or SIG if there's one.
though I keep telling that I'm more than willing to do python reviews
(for free, no swapping!),
very little people ping me.
If everyone does an effort, it will be less of a problem.
PS: please no badges for reviewing, it would probably help getting
at the expense of quality. Reviews quality is also another problem.
I think the last bullet point here is the important part. I understand
the disposition for a technical solution, but someone that just drops
their package in - even after two months - isn't really getting a sense
of community out of the experience. The process as-is, while it can be
frustrating for all the reasons described, encourages new contributors
to get acquainted with their fellow packagers and their sponsors.
I'm not suggesting a de facto "you must be sociable to be a Fedora
Packager", but the process does reinforce that you're not alone when you
get stuck, and you're not so isolated that nobody cares if you make a
mistake. The informal reviews, irc chats, and list mails don't just
garner experience; they help develop a sense of participation, and that
leads to greater contributor retention.
Maybe some list or other communication channel that's more clearly for
packaging issues - I'm told devel@ can be intimidating - would help, but
I'm not really suggesting anything specific. Everyone in the thread
here, and probably far more, have answered inane questions from me at
one time or another :P Sometimes more process and more guides can help,
and sometimes you just need to bounce your understanding of the subject
off someone to clear up misconceptions and gain a little confidence.
That part isn't broken, but maybe new packagers don't know it.
PS: Haïkel, if you're passing out python reviews...