John Goerzen <jgoerzen@complete.org> writes: > On Tue, Feb 01 2022, Russ Allbery wrote: > >> I would hate to entirely lose the quality review that we get via NEW, but >> I wonder if we could regain many those benefits by setting up some sort of >> peer review system for new packages that is less formal and less >> bottlenecked on a single team than the current NEW processing setup. > > This is a fantastic idea. > > In fact, it wouldn't have to bottleneck packages at all. I mean, if a > quality issue is found in NEW, wouldn't the same be an RC bug preventing > a transition to testing? Looking at https://ftp-master.debian.org/REJECT-FAQ.html it looks like one could assemble many of these potential issues into a checklist that ought to be easily within the abilities of any DD to apply. If that assumption is true, we could require that one performs some number of such reviews on packages already in NEW before gaining the right to add another one of your own. Of course, we'd need some way of allocating packages to reviewers, and some way for reviewers to submit their reviews, which would need writing, but once that was done this should ensure that the effort required to do initial checks on packages was spread out more, enabling team members to concentrate on the more skilled bits of the process. It might also act as a recruiting ground for people to get more heavily involved in the FTP team. Cheers, Phil. -- |)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560] HANDS.COM Ltd. |-| http://www.hands.com/ http://ftp.uk.debian.org/ |(| Hugo-Klemm-Strasse 34, 21075 Hamburg, GERMANY
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature