Wednesday, 24 April 2019

Re: Improving the Sponsorship Queue and Other Reports (WAS: Re: State of the Sponsorship Queue - Can we get it to 0?)

On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 11:27 PM Simon Quigley <> wrote:
> Hello Sebastien,
> On 4/23/19 4:47 AM, Sebastien Bacher wrote:
> > Hey Simon,
> >
> > Le 21/04/2019 à 00:12, Simon Quigley a écrit :
> >> Today I spent a few hours sifting through the sponsorship queue. I
> >> sponsored everything I could review and was comfortable sponsoring, and
> >> asked for changes on many bug reports. The queue started out at about 70
> >> (I didn't catch the exact number) and is now down to 13.
> >
> > Good work, it's nice to see some sponsoring activity :-)
> Thanks (to Robie and Gunnar as well)!
> >> One of the most common changes I requested was that people edit bug
> >> descriptions to follow the SRU template for bugs which have sponsorship
> >> requests open for stable releases. Perhaps a message recommending that
> >> could be added to Brian's automatic reply bot.
> >
> > I'm not sure I agree with that being enough of a reason to get them out
> > of the sponsoring queue though. Did you unsubscribe sponsors? Or marked
> > them incomplete? It would be nice to keep those on the list in some way
> > because they can still be useful.
> >
> > Depending of the fix I sometime do edit the description myself&do the
> > upload rather than bouncing back to the contributor.
> >
> > While it's nicer when the bug is ready/needs to work, I don't think
> > enforcing roundtrips over 'paperwork' always benefits the project. When
> > a fix makes sense and addresses a real issue which is easy to verify it
> > can be less effort for everyone to have the sponsor go the extra mile.
> >
> > (in some cases it's not obvious how the bugs can be triggered/tested,
> > then it makes sense to ask for the details and set as incomplete though).
> While I agree with Robie that we have limited contributors working on
> the queue (I have noticed more activity lately from others, thank you!),
> my rationale was to review it purely with an Ubuntu Sponsors Team hat on
> while I was getting the queue to a manageable point; a package is either
> ready to sponsor (sometimes with fix-ups) or it isn't. Sometimes, I can
> understand what a patch is doing by reviewing it, but I would like to
> understand the wider ramifications (if any) from the person that
> reported it. While I recognize this isn't always the case, getting their
> feedback from what can otherwise be a terse bug report has, in my
> experience at least, led to a higher quality paperwork end result.
> Perhaps this is because most of the items I have dealt with recently
> either have an Ubuntu Developer, a Canonical employee, a Debian
> Developer, and/or upstream working on them.
> I would like to address the wider point here, though. Right now we have
> no way to leave a comment directly on the sponsorship queue, much like
> we do with MoM, which would solve this. We have sorting, but the CSS
> (while not entirely important) looks outdated. While I could spend a day
> or two polishing that page specifically, and make it look presentable
> with all the fields we would need, we have several other pages that are
> in a similar state. Here are a few examples:

I've also been thinking of creating modern (dynamic) interfaces to this info.

> These pages are quite scattered; while outputs can come from different
> machines (I have no idea what this looks like internally at Canonical,
> this is just a guess) and different sources (Britney, sru-report, etc.),
> it would be nice to bookmark *one* page that has each of these as clean,
> modern-looking, and consistent pages as sub-pages. From there, we could
> generate reports, perhaps similar to the Debian Maintainer Dashboard.
> I understand this might seem like a significant undertaking, and I am
> willing to do the work in order to make this happen, but I would like to
> have the conversation about whether others would find this useful.
> Please let me know if you are an Ubuntu Developer who would like this
> (or if you object to it, more importantly), and I can create an initial
> specification and mockup to send back to this thread.
> Thanks!
> --
> Simon Quigley
> tsimonq2 on freenode and OFTC
> 5C7A BEA2 0F86 3045 9CC8
> C8B5 E27F 2CF8 458C 2FA4
> --
> ubuntu-devel mailing list
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:

ubuntu-devel mailing list
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: