[Needs SC vote before merging] SC: update collection inclusion procedure

[Andersson007]

Issues we need to solve

• There's an influx of new inclusion requests
• I review them but i spend more time and energy to ping the committee to conduct the second review
• This is not good and frustrating for the collection maintainers: they do work to make their content compliant
• In short, the two reviews and two SC approvals scheme doesn't work and is not gonna work if there no other committed volunteer from SC who will review stuff on a regular basis (if someone wants, please raise your hand)

Solution

• Change the process so that if another person from SC wants to conduct the second review they can go ahead otherwise one review and approval is imo enough.
• I expect someone raises concerns about possible quality deterioration but the two reviews scheme just doesn't work - I regularly published and publish calls for help but there's no interest. We should trust each other, really. If someone has doubts and wants to re-check that, say, a collection has CI running regularly, they can do it.
• We should not make people wait or we should stop including new stuff

Let's discuss the above (copied) in the related topic.

[felixfontein]

Do I understand correctly that the main changes are:

1. Both reviewers must be SC members (before only one of them had to be);
2. The second review can skip most parts of the checklist and concentrate on documentation and development conventions?

[felixfontein]

This is now stricter than the original requirements (one SC person + another community person, which could be SC but doesn't have to be). Is this intentional?

[Andersson007]

I don't think it's practically stricter as now there must be two SC approvals and how we can approve w/o actually reviewing a collection even selectively?

[felixfontein]

Checking a review (and quickly looking at very few files in the collection) is IMO less work than doing a partial review of the collection.

[Andersson007]

@felixfontein i believe it's the same or even less work for the SC member who's checking (who's looking at the code and docs primarily anyway) but there will be no need for the second full review by the third person - so it's actually a significant simplification

[Andersson007]

Do I understand correctly that the main changes are:

1. Both reviewers must be SC members (before only one of them had to be);
2. The second review can skip most parts of the checklist and concentrate on documentation and development conventions?

1. See [Needs SC vote before merging] SC: update collection inclusion procedure #1256 (comment)
2. Yes

[Andersson007]

The vote to merge this PR was positive, merging, thanks everyone!