Re: DAM and NEW queues processing
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 09:24:14AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 08:13:22AM -0700, Don Armstrong a écrit :
> >
> > But all of that said, it still needs trusted people to review the
> > packages, which is where we've traditionally started to have scaling
> > problems.
>
> This is where a public peer-review has an advantage: when submitting and
> reviewing a package we are exposed to the reviews of others. People who make
> good reviews will build a reputation, and will be natural candidates if we want
> to maintain a team of trusted people who have the last word. And conversly, an
> open system lets people try the task and test their commitment before asking
> for a responsability.
>
I'm possibly confused here. You seem to be advocating popping the
decision process from a team of trusted people who have the last word,
and pushing it on to a peer-review system. Which can then be used to
form a team of trusted people who have the last word.
Could you explain?
Neil
--
<dkscully> doesn't the world come to an end if iDunno shaves?
<Maulkin> That's how the dinosaurs died then...
<iDunno> and why the dodo was made extinct, the last known habitat for them
was my beard... poor bastards didn't stand a chance.
Reply to: