On Wed, Mar 09, 2016 at 07:51:08PM +0530, Balasankar C wrote: > On ബുധന് 09 മാര്ച്ച് 2016 09:48 രാവിലെ, Sebastien Badia wrote: > > The idea of a permanent pad (in order to facilitate teamwork) came > > during discussions. > > Good idea, _iff_ it doesn't replace the concept of RFS mails. I > understand it will help DDs of the team get a list of unattended RFSs > quickly and decrease the delay. But, pad should be there to only > support the existing RFS workflow, which uses mails to the team > mailing list, not replace it. > > Main reason is that reviews for RFS mails must be archived as they are > great pointers for beginners and helpful when creating documentation. > The reviews I got for my RFS mails helped me in future packagings and > it happened because the mails get archived. > > Also, RFS mails is a good way for new members to get introduced to > community and improve the bond between community members. > > So, I am all in for the idea, but will practice RFS Mail + Pad entry. :) ACK. Handling RFS through the pad was very useful in the sprint, but now that we are all apart in terms of both space and time, the most useful feature of a pad would be to know what RFS are being processed by whom, so as a sort of coordination effort, i.e. to take notes on things that are going on. -- Antonio Terceiro <terceiro@debian.org>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature