>> I just made a couple of tweaks to the "Join" page:
>>
>> https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Join_the_package_collection_maintainers&diff=186902&oldid=185877
>> https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Join_the_package_collection_maintainers&diff=186903&oldid=186902
>>
>> which makes
Hi,
>> One of the links on spot's "Package Review Process" page
>> (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process) doesn't work -
>> the Review Tracker equivalent to "Packages Currently Under Review" (it
>> links to REVIEW.html but that doesn't exist).
>
> Odd. it works fine here.
>
> Whic
On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 00:45:40 +0100
Richard Fearn wrote:
> I'm a bit late joining this discussion, but did notice a couple of
> issues relating to review request links.
>
> One of the links on spot's "Package Review Process" page
> (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process) doesn't w
I'm a bit late joining this discussion, but did notice a couple of
issues relating to review request links.
One of the links on spot's "Package Review Process" page
(https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process) doesn't work -
the Review Tracker equivalent to "Packages Currently Under Rev
On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 7:19 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Michael Schwendt wrote:
>> For each of the packages, assign its package owner(s) to the review
>> ticket, let them perform the review themselves according to Fedora's
>> Review Guidelines and when done, set the fedora-review flag to '?' and
>>
Michael Schwendt wrote:
> For each of the packages, assign its package owner(s) to the review
> ticket, let them perform the review themselves according to Fedora's
> Review Guidelines and when done, set the fedora-review flag to '?' and
> move the ticket to a final tracker. In other words, let the
Jeff Garzik (jgar...@pobox.com) said:
> Cute re-ordering of events, there. No, after repeated experiences
> with seeking reviews, including this most recent one mentioned
> elsewhere on this list, and seeing others on this list repeating
> review requests, I was inspired to poke around to see why
On Fri, 2010-07-09 at 12:55 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 07/09/2010 03:41 AM, Jussi Lehtola wrote:
> >
> > I started doing merge reviews in late 2008, so far I've finished 24 of
> > them and have 8 reviews currently still open. The biggest problem so far
> > has been the lack of maintainer int
On Fri, 9 Jul 2010 10:19:14 +0200
Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Jul 2010 14:28:13 -0600, Kevin wrote:
>
> > So, here we are today with 242 still open merge reviews:
> > http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/MERGE.html
> > (Plus a few that were closed when they shouldn't have been).
On Thu, 8 Jul 2010 19:47:41 -0400
Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Cute re-ordering of events, there. No, after repeated experiences
> with seeking reviews, including this most recent one mentioned
> elsewhere on this list, and seeing others on this list repeating
> review requests, I was inspired to poke a
On 07/09/2010 01:19 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 08, 2010 at 05:23:40PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 2010-07-08 at 14:28 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>>
>>> Greetings Fedora developers...
>>>
>>
>>> c) Just leave them open and let people pick pick pick
On Thu, 8 Jul 2010 14:28:13 -0600, Kevin wrote:
> So, here we are today with 242 still open merge reviews:
> http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/MERGE.html
> (Plus a few that were closed when they shouldn't have been).
Dumb question first: Where could I have found the URL of that page?
On 07/09/2010 03:41 AM, Jussi Lehtola wrote:
>
> I started doing merge reviews in late 2008, so far I've finished 24 of
> them and have 8 reviews currently still open. The biggest problem so far
> has been the lack of maintainer interest, often nothing has happened
> after my comments. For the maj
On Thu, Jul 08, 2010 at 05:23:40PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-07-08 at 14:28 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > Greetings Fedora developers...
>
> > c) Just leave them open and let people pick pick pick away at them a
> > few at a time? We might be done by Fedora20. Or perhaps not.
On Thu, 08 Jul 2010 17:59:44 -0700
Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> Thank the magic of mediawiki!
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/PackageMaintainers/ReviewRequests
>
> seems several important pages do. So perhaps they should be updated to
> use the link below..
2 of them ar
On Thu, 2010-07-08 at 18:36 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Thu, 08 Jul 2010 20:29:42 -0400
> Jeff Garzik wrote:
>
> > On 07/08/2010 08:23 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2010-07-08 at 14:28 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > >> Greetings Fedora developers...
> > >
> > >> c) Just leave them op
On Thu, 08 Jul 2010 20:29:42 -0400
Jeff Garzik wrote:
> On 07/08/2010 08:23 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Thu, 2010-07-08 at 14:28 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> >> Greetings Fedora developers...
> >
> >> c) Just leave them open and let people pick pick pick away at them
> >> a few at a time? We
On 07/08/2010 08:23 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-07-08 at 14:28 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>> Greetings Fedora developers...
>
>> c) Just leave them open and let people pick pick pick away at them a
>> few at a time? We might be done by Fedora20. Or perhaps not.
>
> Does the existence o
On Thu, 2010-07-08 at 14:28 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> Greetings Fedora developers...
> c) Just leave them open and let people pick pick pick away at them a
> few at a time? We might be done by Fedora20. Or perhaps not.
Does the existence of a bunch of open merge reviews cause any actual
harm
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 6:26 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> I'd like not to assume the worst, but given your mass closing of some
> review bugs, plus your arguments here about why, plus your request for
> a review swap earlier, I'm having trouble reading this as anything other
> than a transparent fr
Jeff Garzik (jgar...@pobox.com) said:
> After a large survey, it is readily apparent that many of these 242
> have been untouched for -years-, for packages that have been merged
> into Fedora and used happily for -years-.
>
> Further hundreds of other reviews outside your 242 are listed as
> assi
On Thu, 2010-07-08 at 14:28 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> So, here we are today with 242 still open merge reviews:
> http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/MERGE.html
> (Plus a few that were closed when they shouldn't have been).
>
> So, what do we do?
>
> Some possible options:
>
> a) Ju
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 4:28 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> So, here we are today with 242 still open merge reviews:
> http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/MERGE.html
> (Plus a few that were closed when they shouldn't have been).
>
> So, what do we do?
>
> Some possible options:
>
> a) Just close
Am Thu, 08 Jul 2010 22:51:57 +0200
schrieb Till Maas :
> On Thu, Jul 08, 2010 at 02:28:13PM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> > c) Just leave them open and let people pick pick pick away at them a
> > few at a time? We might be done by Fedora20. Or perhaps not.
>
> > f) Make a concerted push to cle
On Thu, Jul 08, 2010 at 02:28:13PM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> c) Just leave them open and let people pick pick pick away at them a
> few at a time? We might be done by Fedora20. Or perhaps not.
> f) Make a concerted push to clear the NEEDSPONSOR blocker. Get all
> those folks sponsored and ask
25 matches
Mail list logo