I would like a method other than adding comments to the reviewer to classify updates to existing items.
I really do not mind the queue, however it would be nice to categorize the update as minor (fixing a bug) to high (recoded the entire project).
Something like that would be nice specially since if its a “low” update then the reviewer can easily read your comments and if they feel like it can just be accepted, they move on, otherwise it stays in the queue where it is and they will look at it when its turn comes.
A queue means “First Come, First Served”. Not “Smallest Job, First Served”: Your proposed system falls apart when there is a constant or nearly constant stream of small updates uploaded that would, by your standards, always take priority over larger updates that may have been stalled in the in the queue for a long time, while the reviewer is kept busy with the constant stream of small jobs.
Hey Guys, please be patient with the update queues
The Devs are paying extra close attention to it now because of a few small kinks that were just noticed and reported here.. So better safe than sorry. Thanks for your understanding as always, the updates floodgates should open soon..
Hey Guys, please be patient with the update queues The Devs are paying extra close attention to it now because of a few small kinks that were just noticed and reported here.. So better safe than sorry. Thanks for your understanding as always, the updates floodgates should open soon..
I did not started this thread because of frustration with the recent events in the update queue. It was just an idea.
Patrik has been very helpful with the issue of my item. So do not worry. I got lots of patience
I think the queue rate is alright. Take the AppStore, for example. Items can take up to a fortnight to be accepted.
Whilst you’re waiting for your item to be accepted—make more stuff!
I think the queue at the moment is fine but thought I would mention this idea anyway.
small updates could go into a vote with like 30 trusted users allowed to vote, If the update gets 5 yes votes with 0 no votes its accepted if the ratio of no votes is high then it goes to a reviewer for final approval. You could also who is voting fairly or who should be kicked off the voting board
Oh and the voters will not be able to change anything they can just vote.
Just an idea….
You’re basing this idea on “trust”, but it’s not the issue at all.
The most trusted person in the world can submit an item and make a mistake, a technical mistake, not something made on purpose with malicious intent. I think most rejections are due to technicalities.
Today we do have a group of trusted authors, they’re called reviewers and they happen to be part of the community, with their own portfolios. Creating another layer of people to check updates is just the same. Might as well hire more reviewers.It’s not a good idea to speed up the queue IMO . The queue is going at full speed now, but I think I might remove my item before it reaches it, because I’m afraid it won’t get a chance to be shown long enough on the home page before its trampled by the next reviewed batch.
I agree with the queue being fast enough at the moment and the system I was talking about would not be for new items, only items that have been updated e.g the preview, title, keywords all the simple stuff. I say trusted users meaning not someone that has signed up today, adding a system like this would also make the community feel like they are taking part in the process.
Its just an idea not something I feel we need at this point.
As majid_abdul already said, even the best (in any way you want to put it ) authors can make a mistake. Someone could upload the wrong main file, because you have 10 files called “main”. Someone could not upload a file at all and then you’re going to have issues with empty files on the boards.
The other thing is that we know the rules really well because we apply them dozens of times a day. If you just forget one little rule, that would normally get you rejected, then we’re going to have a lot of items that don’t fit that “one little rule”.
We have this reviewing job not because it’s just a cool thing to do, but because it’s real necessary to have that 2nd person looking over your files and to apply a centralized policy.
I can understand the attitude towards the update queue though, I’d like to mention that it’s a result of subtle policy changes which have led to more soft-rejections and a combination of a few bugs still left in the update queue that don’t allow us to review it as much as we’d want to.
With regards to the normal queue on GR, I’ve noticed that over the past week or two (with exception of the bug period) the review time for a file has gone below the 48h mark. With half of the items being reviewed under 24h. So I think we’re doing pretty good there.
I’d also like to remind our authors that when you are updating your already approved item, it is still on sale. People tend to think that we take the item offline when it’s in the update queue, it’s not.