I'm OK with that. Just make it clear that the sheriff does have authority. One time when I was sheriff I wanted to revert a broken patch. The author insisted on patching it over and over. He finally got it working about about seven patches and nearly three hours or so, when I was insisting on backing it out after the first 30m.
Avi On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 5:34 PM, Peter Kasting <pkast...@google.com> wrote: > On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 2:08 PM, Ojan Vafai <o...@chromium.org> wrote: > >> To be clear, here's the proposed policy: Any change that would close the >> tree can be reverted if it can't be fixed in <2 minutes. >> > > How about: > > If a change closes the tree, the change author has 1 or 2 minutes to > respond to a ping. The change should be reverted if the author doesn't > respond, if he says to revert, or if he does not say he has a fix within the > next 5 minutes. > > I can't fix _any_ problem in 2 minutes. But I can fix most of them in 5. > The goal is to allow the author a reasonable chance to fix trivial problems > before we revert. And I think the tree should go ahead and close during > that interval. > > PK > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---