On 24/01/2009, at 23.25, Scott Kitterman wrote: > Could we call the first stage something other than "New"? New > already has > a specific meaning in the archive and I think it'd be better not to > overload the term. > > How about "Unreviewed"?
I have no problem with this, and suggestions for good, descriptive names of the various stages of the process is most welcome. I have edited the document to reflect ScottK's suggestion. > If I understand your proposal correctly, the primary change is to > segregate > packages that have never been looked at and packages that were > advocated at > some point from packages that have been reviewed, but have never had > an > advocate. Is that right? Yes, exactly. > I can see some potential for benifit with this. It does sound like > you are > proposing a manual step of marking a package off the "New" list. I > think > this should be automatic. It was my intention to state that a MOTU can go to the "Unreviewed" list, deposit a review, and the package would automatically be promoted to the "In Process" list. I have added the word "automatic" to the description, making that clearer. Thanks! Morten -- Morten Kjeldgaard <[email protected]> Ubuntu MOTU Developer GPG Key ID: 404825E7 -- Ubuntu-motu mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
