On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 10:12 PM, William Stein <wst...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 9:52 PM, Craig Citro <craigci...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>> Maybe I'm just hung up on the word "assign", since it does most of >>>> what I would want, it just seems pushy. >>> >>> I put the relevant usernames in the cc: box, presuming that they might >>> take the hint. Do they? I haven't collected data :) >>> >> >> Indeed, I think what Nick's describing is a really good system. I've >> often been cc'd on tickets, and I've definitely reviewed many of those >> (which I presumably wouldn't have otherwise seen). > > Well, for the record, on about 4 occasions I have systematically went > through and read all tickets that "needs review", for each one come up > with 1-2 people who could review them, then wrote those people a > personal email asking them to do the review if possible. In practice > this does work very very well. This exactly mirrors the review system > used by journals. I will continue doing this until I can convince > somebody else to help out.
I just want to add that in my experience people (1) often consider it an honor to be asked to review tickets, and (2) very often they do an amazing job when asked, and (3) likely wouldn't review anything otherwise, perhaps because they are too humble. I can think of many people who might never have considered themselves "qualified" to review before I asked them, but when asked they really stepped up and in fact did a *great* job. (You know who you are -- thanks!) William --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
