Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets

[Parag Nemade]

On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 2:35 PM, Parag Nemade <panemade at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 12:43 PM, Miroslav Suchý <msuchy at redhat.com> wrote:
>> Recently we had discussion here about the queue of package reviews with
>> FE-NEEDSPONSOR flag.
>> I suggested to write some script which would query db and reveal those
>> sponsors who does not make his duty.
>>
>> Here comes this script:
>>    https://github.com/xsuchy/guard-fedora-sponsors
>>
>> It is first version and I'm sure there will be some false negatives. The
>> current logic is:
>> 1. query FAS to get all usernames from packager group who are sponsors
>> 2. for each such user get all bugs from past 365 day for Package Review
>> component which are assigned to this sponsor
>> 3. give the sponsor some credit when he changed bug status (to whatever
>> state) as this indicate some work on this bug
>> 4. give the sponsor some credit if he remove FE-NEEDSPONSOR from blocking
>> bugs as this indicate finishing sponsor work
>>
>> This does not reflect if you sponsor somebody directly. E.g. because he want
>> to be become co-maintainer and does not submit package review.
>>
>> This time I run it for past year. So this script reveals those who does not
>> sponsor anybody for whole year. I hope that in future I can lower this
>> constant to half year or even 3 months.
>>
>> Ideas, patches and comments about this script are welcome.
>>
>
> So, how are you going to address my issue?  I always work using my
> email id which is associated with inactive/old FAS id but I never want
> to use email in bugzilla which is associated with my newly migrated
> FAS id. I have always kept a line between my fedora
> development/packaging work and my voluntary package review work.
>
> I know the intent behind this is to soon remove inactive sponsors from
> sponsors group.

Just found one thing while triaging needsponsor reviews that loveshack
is already sponsored but his one package submission was still blocking
177841. It will be good if either sponsorer or sponsoree will remove
blocking to 177841 from all the reviews when someone gets sponsored
his package in packager.


>
> Regards,
> Parag.