Yaar and I discussed making changes to that effect last week, he's working on that.
:DG< On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 10:33 AM, David Levin <le...@chromium.org> wrote: > If it isn't written > here http://dev.chromium.org/developers/how-tos/webkit-merge-1, then (imo) > it isn't policy for gardener. :) Given that not everyone is in the same > place, if it isn't written in the standard place, how will folks know? > Even then, if you add something new, it would be nice to tell folks b/c I'm > sure not everyone checks that every time they start gardening. > dave > On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 10:25 AM, Jeremy Orlow <jor...@chromium.org> wrote: >> >> On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 10:19 AM, David Levin <le...@google.com> wrote: >>> >>> That sounds like a reasonable policy. >> >> Hmm...I thought this was the policy. I guess not? :-) >> >>> >>> There is the current idea of figuring out something about the crash >>> before filing a bug, which clashes with this idea. >>> What text would you add >>> to http://dev.chromium.org/developers/how-tos/webkit-merge-1 to tell how to >>> deal with these? Here's one idea (add it in red?): >>> >>> If you must roll WebKit DEPS and pick up new crashers, you should enter >>> an individual bug for each new crasher immediately and make it P0. >>> >>> Then what about assigning. Does it go to the unlucky webkit gardener who >>> happened to have the duty that day? (If they have another day of gardening, >>> then these bug linger.) >> >> If the gardener has time, sure. If not, maybe assign it to whomever makes >> the most sense. And, when there's no obvious candidate, they can draft >> someone. (In general, I think we should empower gardeners to draft people >> when there are lots of high prioirity items stacking up and/or we get really >> behind ToT.) >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 9:23 AM, Jeremy Orlow <jor...@chromium.org> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Today I noticed a bunch of recently added CRASH test expectations for >>>> layout tests. I know that we sometimes have to roll in a crasher or two, >>>> but aren't we supposed to be filing p0-p1, dev channel release blockers at >>>> least until we can prove the crash is not exploitable in the browser and >>>> ideally not before the crash is fixed?? >>>> Btw: >>>> $ grep CRASH test_expectations.txt | egrep -v '^//' | wc -l >>>> 56 >>>> And many of them are fairly new. >>>> J >>>> >>> >> >> >> > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
