On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 4:18 PM, Rosanne DiMesiodimesio@earthlink.net wrote:
On Mon, 29 Jun 2009 15:48:17 +0200 Remco remco47@gmail.com wrote:
Ok, I thought everybody got their AppDB updates by mail. But whichever way you receive notice of queued submissions without maintainers, that's where the maintained submissions can be sent after 24 hours.
Remco
Admins can already see all test reports in the queue. That's not the issue. The issue is removing maintainers who aren't doing their job. If we do their job for them, with no consequences to the negligent maintainer, that merely covers up the problem.
So the issue is not that queued submissions aren't handled, but... what? I thought the problem was unhandled submissions, caused by negligent maintainers. But if that problem is not there, what problem are negligent maintainers causing?
Remco
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 8:38 AM, Remco remco47@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 4:18 PM, Rosanne DiMesiodimesio@earthlink.net wrote:
On Mon, 29 Jun 2009 15:48:17 +0200 Remco remco47@gmail.com wrote:
Ok, I thought everybody got their AppDB updates by mail. But whichever way you receive notice of queued submissions without maintainers, that's where the maintained submissions can be sent after 24 hours.
Remco
Admins can already see all test reports in the queue. That's not the
issue. The issue is removing maintainers who aren't doing their job. If we do their job for them, with no consequences to the negligent maintainer, that merely covers up the problem.
So the issue is not that queued submissions aren't handled, but... what? I thought the problem was unhandled submissions, caused by negligent maintainers. But if that problem is not there, what problem are negligent maintainers causing?
Remco
It sounds like they're causing too much extra work for the admins. What if the system checked for "Out of Office" bounces and used that to know that a maintainer was not going to be able to handle the submission for a while?
Erich Hoover ehoover@mines.edu
-
Erich Hoover -
Remco