Package review backlog.

[David Woodhouse]

On Tue, 2008-10-14 at 06:48 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> On 13.10.2008 20:56, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > Thorsten Leemhuis (fedora at leemhuis.info) said: 
> >> I propose that each FESCo member should try to work on at least one  
> >> package review per week. Each week at the FESCo meeting all FESCo  
> >> members should be asked what they did (as FESCo member) over the past  
> >> week to improve Fedora; they further should be asked what they (as FESCo  
> >> member) plan for the coming week to improve Fedora. That includes, but  
> >> is not limited to reviews.
> > This seems rather silly -
> 
> Of course it is -- just like the original proposal from dwmw2 imho, 
> where FESCo members were just asked what reviews they did (and nothing 
> else). But many people liked that "one review per week" proposal, hence 
> I thought I better come up with something else that goes in the same 
> direction, but at least is not that bad.

Yes. The 'justify your existence to the electorate' connotations really
weren't intended.

Maybe a one-line report to FESCo each week, stating the number of
reviews completed in the past week and the number still outstanding,
would be perfectly sufficient. It wasn't about _forcing_ people to
comply; it was just to keep it fresh in our minds, and make sure we
remember that we agreed to do it (if, indeed, we _do_ agree to do it. So
far it's just a suggestion).

-- 
David Woodhouse                            Open Source Technology Centre
David.Woodhouse at intel.com                              Intel Corporation