Meetings
Differences between revisions 223 and 224
|
Size: 397
Comment:
|
Size: 1476
Comment: Added REVU discussion to agenda
|
| Deletions are marked like this. | Additions are marked like this. |
| Line 9: | Line 9: |
| * Add your item here | 1. Discussion about REVU. The site is very popular with the community, and there are currently ~120 packages in the "needs review" queue. However not enough MOTUs are working on doing reviews, and the queue is constantly growing. We need to discuss how to improve the situation. * Nhandler has proposed a more thorough automatic checking of packages. Perhaps as a filter before reaching a "human" review? * Should we -- for a short period, until the queue is under control -- dispense with the "two-MOTU-advocacy" rule? * Is it possible to close REVU for new uploads (only allowing re-upload of revised packages)? Should we in the future close REVU during some periods of a release cycle? * Should we have a "welcome" list in REVU, for uploads that have ''never been reviewed''? * Should REVU ask for some data from the uploader about the software, so we can quickly and easily see what kind of software it is? I.e. multimedia software might attract attention from Ubuntu Studio, etc. This could be a way to gain interest and motivation from a wider group of reviewers. * |
Thursday, December 6th 2012, 16:00 UTC
Please, if you're interested in the organization and proceedings of the MOTU crew, drop by in #ubuntu-meeting on irc.freenode.net.
Agenda
- Discussion about REVU. The site is very popular with the community, and there are currently ~120 packages in the "needs review" queue. However not enough MOTUs are working on doing reviews, and the queue is constantly growing. We need to discuss how to improve the situation.
- Nhandler has proposed a more thorough automatic checking of packages. Perhaps as a filter before reaching a "human" review?
- Should we -- for a short period, until the queue is under control -- dispense with the "two-MOTU-advocacy" rule?
- Is it possible to close REVU for new uploads (only allowing re-upload of revised packages)? Should we in the future close REVU during some periods of a release cycle?
Should we have a "welcome" list in REVU, for uploads that have never been reviewed?
- Should REVU ask for some data from the uploader about the software, so we can quickly and easily see what kind of software it is? I.e. multimedia software might attract attention from Ubuntu Studio, etc. This could be a way to gain interest and motivation from a wider group of reviewers.
MOTU meetings' reports can be found on MOTU/Meetings/Minutes.
Go back to MOTU.
CategoryMOTU
MOTU/Meetings (last edited 2012-11-26 11:04:13 by dholbach)