[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