Just some random thoughts about whether pagure could be leveraged for handling package reviews. Note that I haven't looked at the current status of Fresque

• We'd need a namespace for package reviews, or a separate pagure instance like we'd have for dist-git.

• Better landing pages to order and sort existing package reviews by various criteria, so we wouldn't need the review tracker page.

• Some concept of flags on a repository or repository metadata to indicate "sponsor needed" or "approved". Need rights on this metadata, too so only packagers can approve a package. We don't need assignment, though; it should be possible for any packager to approve any in-review package at any time. The idea is to foster quick bits of review work instead of putting people on the hook for doing a review. A packager can always subscribe/follow/watch a particular repository if they want to keep up with it.

• How to handle abandoned reviews, since a repository would have an owner in a way a bugzilla ticket doesn't. Need to consider duplicate reviews as well. We can't currently rename a repository; can we move repositories between namespaces?

• Would really want the ability to click on a line in a source file and open an issue there, in the same manner as you can comment on a line in a patch in a PR. I know you can "fork and edit" and then send a PR, but that's not what's needed here, because the idea is to point out issues in a spec, not to have the reviewer do all of that fixing.

• Hook up some form of CI so the package is rebuilt and rpmlint/fedora-review/whatnot are run as things change.

• Do we need dependencies between repositories somehow? Would be useful in some sense, though one alternative would simply be to not open multiple reviews at once. The CI would show them as not building in any case.