Package review backlog.

[John Poelstra]

David Woodhouse said the following on 10/10/2008 07:30 AM Pacific Time:
> On Fri, 2008-10-10 at 15:33 +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote:
>> Am Freitag, den 10.10.2008, 14:14 +0100 schrieb David Woodhouse:
>>
>>> I propose that each FESCo member should try to work on at least one
>>> package review per week. Each week at the FESCo meeting, we'll ask
>>> members which reviews they've worked on in the past week.
>>>
>>> It won't be _mandatory_ -- 
>> [snipped] 
>>
>> As a rule of thumb it's ok, but it should not be mandatory. I think the
>> FESCo members are already having a lot of work to do and I'm not sure if
>> everybody has enough spare time for reviews.
> 
> Absolutely. Besides, if you do call it 'mandatory' you have to start
> defining what would happen if people don't comply, and the whole thing
> just gets silly.
> 
> I'm talking about a 'recommended practice', and just asking people each
> week which packages they've looked at. Nothing more.
> 
> And even though people are busy, it shouldn't actually take _that_ long
> to make progress on reviewing a single package, each week.
> 

http://tinyurl.com/4kt682
1,212 open Package Review bugs

I think Jason Tibbitts put up a wiki page with some ideas for getting 
help from the bug triage team triaging the Package Review bugs... with 
1,212 open there have to be some dead ones there.  Right now the bug 
triage team ignores all bugs with component "Package Review".

This is definitely doable and would be even better if we could form some 
type of reciprocal arrangement with maintainers or package reviewers to 
triage regular bugs.

John