>>>> Mattia Verga <mattia.verga(a)protonmail.com>
I think the process for becoming a packager is really rusty. We
currently require to submit a valid package review submission AND to
find a sponsor AND to prove them you're able "to convince an existing
sponsor-level member that you understand and follow the project's
guidelines and processes".
Actually, since we decoupled the sponsorship process from the review
process some years ago, it's simply submit a package, get it reviewed,
file ticket asking for sponsor (https://pagure.io/packager-sponsors
There are currently no open tickets for people with reviewed packages
who have not found a sponsor. So... I'm guessing the issue is one of
the process being poorly documented, rather than some other issue with
the difficulty of the sponsorship process. I know it's laid out in
(because I put it
there ages ago) but I'm sure there are other places it needs to be.
The latest part seems quite subjective to me.
It's not really subjective. The review itself is, of course,
subjective, but sponsorship is more about having someone around who can
help you get the package imported and built, answer questions about
updates and such, and just keep an eye out just in case of any weirdness
reviewing: I'll help you get that package in shape.
sponsorship: I'll help you get that quality package out there where
everyone can use it.
Moreover, it's becoming harder and harder for the few sponsors
follow all the requests: look at the approved package submissions list
 where a lot of those are stuck waiting for a sponsor.
Because the sponsorship process is decoupled from reviewing, lack of
sponsorship doesn't prevent reviews from moving forward, although of
course there are surely other reasons that novice packagers might have a
tougher time getting packages through the review process.
So, what about moving the sponsorship part to use an entry test?
I think that would make it more difficult than it is now, not less. And
wouldn't help with the things that a sponsor is actually expected to do.