[theme-reviewers] Questions for Otto/Nacin

Edward Caissie edward.caissie at gmail.com
Fri Oct 8 19:02:25 UTC 2010

Now that I see "authenticated" users really cannot be much use to new Theme
Reviews I better understand the idea you are putting forward, but unless we
can restrict resolution options by group then what you are suggesting would
be no different from the "reviewers" group that already exists ... at least
that is how I am reading the permission sets available on the Trac wiki
here: http://trac.edgewall.org/wiki/TracPermissions

There may be potential to a group that is only able to "suggest" resolutions
as that will also allow for clearer explanations of what each resolution
means to a Theme author.


On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 2:44 PM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net> wrote:

> 1) We don't want everyone and their brothers (i.e. all authenticated users)
> to be resolving tickets. So, I would advise against this approach.
> 2) The issue isn't that "merely" authenticated users cannot review Themes
> or leave comments on tickets; rather, it is that the process of "assigning"
> those Themes, and then following up on them, is an entirely manual process
> without a Trainee user group.
> So, the only way to allow tickets to be assigned (in the system), and
> tracked (in the system), without allowing the entire world the ability to
> resolve/close tickets, is to add a Trainee group.
> Is there some downside to this idea that you're seeing and that I'm not
> seeing?
> Chip
> On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 1:30 PM, Edward Caissie <edward.caissie at gmail.com>wrote:
>> Although I haven't tested it, the current permission set allows anyone to
>> log in and start reviewing.
>> As long as the reviewer, new or "trainee", assigns the ticket to themself
>> then the process should flow correctly.
>> The only benefit I am seeing at the moment to a "Trainee" group, and that
>> can simply be done by adjusting the "authenticated" group, is the resolution
>> restrictions.
>> Cais.
>> PS: Confirmed an authenticated user can only leave comments no resolution
>> or assigning permissions available. EAC
>> On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 1:59 PM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>wrote:
>>> On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 12:22 PM, Edward Caissie <
>>> edward.caissie at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 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.
>>> True; but what I'm envisioning by leaving the Trainee workflow as
>>> informal would *also* lead to additional administrative maintenance. Without
>>> a Trainee being able to assign himself a ticket to review, we (the
>>> Reviewers) have no idea what ticket a Trainee is reviewing (or, we're
>>> dependent upon them leaving a comment on the ticket, "claiming" it). I can
>>> see some workflow "clashes" if a Trainee "claims" a ticket, only to have
>>> another Reviewer complete the review for that ticket simultaneously (since
>>> everyone is working from the FIFO model for the review queue).
>>> Further: we have no direct way of knowing when a Trainee has completed a
>>> review, since the Trainee cannot change the ticket status. We are again
>>> dependent upon the Trainee reporting back to the Team, via email or
>>> whatever.
>>>> 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?
>>> 1) I'm certainly *hoping* for an influx of reviewers. The process is
>>> simply not sustainable without more hands. Frumph had a mad rush to get the
>>> queue back in line several weeks ago, but that certainly wasn't sustainable,
>>> as it took basically all his time for about an entire week. I've been trying
>>> to do the same, but I've been operating at a pace that is also not
>>> sustainable, long-term. (That said, I'm going to try to clear out the
>>> Priority #2 Queue tonight and tomorrow, as I have some free time.)
>>> 2) I would think that a new reviewer getting "Trainee" status would be as
>>> simple as someone saying, "how do I review Themes?", and then you or Pross
>>> adding that person to the Reviewer Trainee group, and setting them off to
>>> work on the first available ticket. :)
>>> 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/20101008/787c6a02/attachment.htm>

More information about the theme-reviewers mailing list