Package Review Stats for 2008

[David Timms]

Michael Schwendt wrote:
> There are first-time revievers and people, who are afraid of doing
> mistakes in reviews and who therefore don't review anything to stay on
> the safe side. 
Perhaps we could ask that people with little package activity after 
having there package accepted need to perform at least one review per 
year. This sort of says "I'm keeping up with the guidelines".

> Encourage them to ask for a review of their review
> prior to approval. Reward active contributors with becoming a
I like this bit, even though not really related to the reward process. 
In eg mozilla, changes on the source code require the developer put 
patches on a bug, requests review, reviewer makes comments, to help 
improve patch, developer updates patch. Eventually reviewer may sign 
off, then a superreviewer needs to be found who oversees a major area of 
the source. Only once both r+ and sr+ have provided signoff, are commits 
to cvs allowed.

In Fedora packaging, I'm sure there are people who are experts in 
general areas like java packaging, gnome desktop, multimedia etc, who 
could be called on to check over a package where the main reviewer sees 
is otherwise ready to be accepted.

DaveT.