[theme-reviewers] splitting reviewers between queues

Angelo Bertolli angelo.bertolli at gmail.com
Thu Jan 26 15:55:29 UTC 2012


... or just two queues:  one for things in extend, one for new stuff

On 01/26/2012 10:53 AM, Edward Caissie wrote:
> To be honest, I would accept removing the Priority queues altogether and
> going back to the much more simpler FIFO approach.
> 
> Granted, if a theme author is submitting a "bug-fix" on an approved
> theme then those should take some precedence over other themes, but if
> the submission is simply an update to an existing approved theme the
> only real difference we have in the process is, generally speaking, the
> theme is reviewed via Diff versus a complete "new" review.
> 
> Using a simple FIFO approach would then (hopefully) address the issue of
> "old" tickets.
> 
> 
> Cais.
> 
> 
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net
> <mailto:chip at chipbennett.net>> wrote:
> 
>     That is true; while we want to encourage and facilitate bugfixes for
>     currently approved Themes, we still hold those Themes to the same
>     standards, and expect the developers to remain current with respect
>     to the Theme Review Guidelines. Note that the two-day rule will help
>     here, as a Theme would only regress to the Priority #3 queue if/when
>     a ticket is *closed* as not-approved.
> 
>     That said: we could certainly consider revising the Priority #1
>     queue query, to include *all* Themes with a previously *approved*
>     ticket. Thoughts?
> 
>     Chip
> 
> 
>     On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 9:28 AM, Angelo Bertolli
>     <angelo.bertolli at gmail.com <mailto:angelo.bertolli at gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>         I thought once you get rejected, you get sent to #3 the next
>         time, even
>         if your theme is already on extend... shouldn't the priority to
>         get bug
>         fixes out apply to anything that's on extend?
> 
>         On 01/26/2012 10:15 AM, Chip Bennett wrote:
>         > ...and also - equally importantly - as an incentive for
>         developers of
>         > already approved Themes to continue to submit improvements and
>         bugfixes
>         > for their Themes. It is imperative that Themes already in use
>         by end
>         > users have an expedited path to approval of such bugfixes and
>         updates.
>         >
>         > Chip
>         >
>         > On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 9:13 AM, Edward Caissie
>         > <edward.caissie at gmail.com <mailto:edward.caissie at gmail.com>
>         <mailto:edward.caissie at gmail.com
>         <mailto:edward.caissie at gmail.com>>> wrote:
>         >
>         >     The essential premises of the Trac review priority is still
>         one of
>         >     FIFO (First-In First-Out).
>         >     The ideas behind the Priority queues was to facilitate quicker
>         >     reviewers of known themes; and to help identify themes for
>         reviewers
>         >     so they are aware of any history that may be involved.
>         >
>         >     For example a custom query such as this one:
>         >    
>         http://themes.trac.wordpress.org/query?owner=&status=new&col=id&col=summary&col=status&col=type&col=priority&col=time&col=changetime&order=time
>         <http://themes.trac.wordpress.org/query?owner=&status=new&col=id&col=summary&col=status&col=type&col=priority&col=time&col=changetime&order=time>
>         >    
>         <http://themes.trac.wordpress.org/query?owner=&status=new&col=id&col=summary&col=status&col=type&col=priority&col=time&col=changetime&order=time
>         <http://themes.trac.wordpress.org/query?owner=&status=new&col=id&col=summary&col=status&col=type&col=priority&col=time&col=changetime&order=time>>
>         >     shows a list of all open tickets (168 at the moment) where
>         the one
>         >     at the top should be the prime priority theme. The Priority
>         queues
>         >     were introduced to quickly pick out those themes (ideally
>         previously
>         >     approved in their last submission) to pick the "low hanging
>         fruit".
>         >
>         >
>         >     Cais.
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         >     On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 10:02 AM, Chandra Maharzan
>         >     <maharzan at gmail.com <mailto:maharzan at gmail.com>
>         <mailto:maharzan at gmail.com <mailto:maharzan at gmail.com>>> wrote:
>         >
>         >         This would be great. I haven't seen queue 2, 3 moving
>         at all for
>         >         a long time. :)
>         >
>         >         2012/1/26 futeng.org <http://futeng.org>
>         <http://futeng.org> <bbq at futeng.org <mailto:bbq at futeng.org>
>         >         <mailto:bbq at futeng.org <mailto:bbq at futeng.org>>>:
>         >         > I hope so!
>         >         >
>         >         >
>         >         > ------------------ Original ------------------
>         >         > From: "Kirk Wight";
>         >         > Date: 2012年1月26日(星期四) 晚上10:25
>         >         > To: "theme-reviewers";
>         >         > Subject: [theme-reviewers] splitting reviewers
>         between queues
>         >         >
>         >         > Hello reviewers,
>         >         >
>         >         > I'm wondering if we should consider splitting
>         reviewers between
>         >         some
>         >         > different queues, just to keep all queues moving.
>         >         >
>         >         > I haven't seen queue 1 empty yet myself since the
>         "getting back
>         >         on track"
>         >         > changes in December. I've also noticed that queue 1
>         can get a
>         >         bit dominated
>         >         > if submitters are quite active (no fault of their own -
>         >         obviously we need to
>         >         > keep encouraging regular updates to themes).
>         >         >
>         >         > Maybe, for now, we could assign a reviewer to each of
>         queues 2,
>         >         3 and 4, and
>         >         > everyone else plugs away as always?
>         >         >
>         >         > _______________________________________________
>         >         > theme-reviewers mailing list
>         >         > theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>         <mailto:theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org>
>         >         <mailto:theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>         <mailto:theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org>>
>         >         >
>         http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>         >         >
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         >         --
>         >         cmans
>         >         _______________________________________________
>         >         theme-reviewers mailing list
>         >         theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>         <mailto:theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org>
>         >         <mailto:theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>         <mailto:theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org>>
>         >         http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         >     _______________________________________________
>         >     theme-reviewers mailing list
>         >     theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>         <mailto:theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org>
>         >     <mailto:theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>         <mailto:theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org>>
>         >     http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         > _______________________________________________
>         > theme-reviewers mailing list
>         > theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>         <mailto:theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org>
>         > http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>         _______________________________________________
>         theme-reviewers mailing list
>         theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>         <mailto:theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org>
>         http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
> 
> 
> 
>     _______________________________________________
>     theme-reviewers mailing list
>     theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>     <mailto:theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org>
>     http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> theme-reviewers mailing list
> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers


More information about the theme-reviewers mailing list