Unblocking fixture reviews

[Ilidur]

Hello! I made some fixture contributions recently and tried to figure out how long it might take to integrate them in the library. I noticed that the backlog is quite significant.

I think there are a few categories of submissions:

• missing data/fails validation (bronze)
• doesn't meet the contribution specification(no of links/all channels/etc) but otherwise it is a validated fixture (silver)
• passes all requirements, reviewed by one person against manual or in use (gold) CONTRIBUTING.md

I think having a classification embedded in the fixture will help speed up the review and allow fixtures to be available for those needing a fixture without being perfect.

This would need a schema change. Maybe an element called "quality" with an enum: ["bronze", "silver", "gold"], or be more specific and says enum: ["Unvalidated", "Incomplete", "Complete"]. This can be suggested in the PR as a comment before merging.

This will allow software maintainers to decide which categories they would like to bulk export.

[FloEdelmann]

Hi @Ilidur, thanks for your suggestion. However, I have to decline it. This is my reasoning:

missing data/fails validation (bronze)

If it fails validation, then it will almost certainly cause issues when displaying or exporting the fixture.

doesn't meet the contribution specification(no of links/all channels/etc) but otherwise it is a validated fixture (silver)

Since we don't have editing functionality yet, this would keep half-ready fixtures in the library for longer, and not encourage users to provide high-quality and complete fixtures. Also, I think it's better to have fewer high-quality fixtures than to have many low-quality and a few high-quality fixtures.

The accumulated fixture backlog is indeed significant, but there is a better way to deal with it:

• ☑ Help with reviewing new fixtures #2429

When a fixture is already (pre-)reviewed and easy to merge, its chances to be merged fast are quite high. I'd be happy to see your help here 🙂