[theme-reviewers] Questions for Otto/Nacin

[Edward Caissie]

I agree with the idea of new reviewers having some sort of workflow to
follow to make the initial reviews easier to get done; and, for these new
reviewers to become more involved with the process.

Although I understand the suggestion of a "Reviewer Trainee" group the basic
premise is any community member can write a review for most any theme
provided they follow the basic guidelines for writing a Theme review. We
essentially have this already documented, perhaps it needs to be re-worded
or re-written to take into consideration the recent changes in the Theme
Trac management.

IMO, if a new reviewer is not able to follow the outline(s) already provided
putting them in a "Reviewer Trainee" group may not correct any potential
issues but would create more administrative maintenance. Explaining and
documenting the process to be used may be more beneficial than restricting
what resolutions a new reviewer can use.

Given all of the above still leaves me with a question, or two: do you see a
great influx of new reviewers around the corner; and, how long do you expect
a new reviewer to have the "Trainee" status?


Cais.


On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 11:38 AM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net> wrote:

> The entire idea behind the suggestion is to create a proper workflow for
> Review Trainees. With as little manual intervention as possible, we need a
> way to:
>
> 1) Assign a ticket to a Reviewer Trainee (requires a "Reviewer Trainee"
> user group, with appropriate permissions)
> 2) Have Reviewer Trainee review ticket, leave review comments, and
> close/resolve the ticket (requires Reviewer Trainee-specific ticket
> resolutions)
> 3) Alert a Reviewer that a Reviewer Trainee has completed a review that
> requires an audit (requires custom reports based on Reviewer
> Trainee-specific ticket resolutions)
> 4) Have a Reviewer audit the ticket, and close/resolve appropriately,
> confirming (or not) the suggested resolution
>
> Having user-group specific ticket resolutions would create systemic
> controls over the process, thus requiring less manual intervention. In any
> case, we can surely implement the Reviewer Trainee user group, and
> suggest-approval/suggest-not-approval ticket resolutions. We would just have
> to rely on *telling* the Reviewer Trainees only to use the "suggest-"
> resolutions, and auditing to ensure that they follow those instructions.
>
> This will also help clarify (or redefine) the use of "suggest-approval" and
> "needs-additional-review" - one of which can be removed, depending on which
> way we choose to go.
>
> Chip
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 10:16 AM, Edward Caissie <edward.caissie at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Although I would like to know more behind these ideas Chip ... I do like
>> the idea of the "suggest-not-approved" resolution, it could even replace the
>> "needs-additional-review" resolution.
>>
>> BUT, each resolution needs to be clearly defined, or at least defined well
>> enough so it is easily understood when to use; and, what is required when
>> using each.
>>
>>
>> Cais
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 10:42 AM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>wrote:
>>
>>> Otto/Nacin,
>>>
>>> Is it possible to restrict Trac ticket resolution options by user group?
>>> For example, can Group A be restricted to Resolution 1 and Resolution 2,
>>> while Group B is restricted to Resolution C and Resolution D?
>>>
>>> If so, would it be possible to implement the following for Theme-Trac?
>>>
>>> New User Group: Review Trainee
>>>
>>> Ticket Resolution Permissions:
>>>
>>>  - approved (Reviewer, Review Admin)
>>>  - not-approved (Reviewer, Review Admin)
>>>  - suggest-approval (Review Trainee)
>>>  - suggest-not-approved (Reviewer Trainee)
>>>  - DELETE needs-additional-review
>>>
>>> Alternately (a decision for Cais/Pross, I think):
>>>
>>>  - approved (Reviewer, Review Admin)
>>>  - not-approved (Reviewer, Review Admin)
>>>  - needs-additional-review (Review Trainee)
>>>  - DELETE suggest-approval
>>>
>>> Thoughts? Is this possible?
>>>
>>> Chip
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>>> 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
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> theme-reviewers mailing list
> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wordpress.org/pipermail/theme-reviewers/attachments/20101008/03b31b52/attachment-0001.htm>