Package Review Stats for the week ending January 18th, 2009

[Paul W. Frields]

On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 06:48:22AM -0500, Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
> Robert Scheck wrote:
> 
> > You are not blocking them, if you do nothing. But you would block them, if
> > you would refuse suggestions or pointings to the Guidelines. There were
> > (are?) reviews, where a patch and/or a full formal review has been done,
> > but the maintainer never has shown up or just told "no, I won't do that, I
> > am upstream". That is blocking and/or refusing. I mentioned examples for
> > exactly such cases in my previous e-mails and Paul is also aware of them
> > (at least he was, when I told him that 6 months ago).
> 
> Well, that just makes no sense.  In those cases you should follow up with
> Fedora leadership to resolve it. 

He has, and Spot and I are working on the merge review issue with the
different Red Hat teams internally.  We've given the team managers a
number of different options to consider, and right now Spot's in the
process of locating a selection of packages we can concentrate on to
make some progress.  We're trying to balance out our desire to get
these merge reviews completed with the fact that most of the engineers
in question labor under a constant, heavy workload that includes a
great deal of maintenance work for RHEL 4 and 5.

> All I'm asking you is to NOT extend that to all "RH guys" (that
> expression is sexist btw).

Hear, hear.

-- 
Paul W. Frields                                http://paul.frields.org/
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
  http://redhat.com/   -  -  -  -   http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
  irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20090129/2535bef4/attachment.bin