(moving dev-b2g to bcc because cross-group threads are evil) We do have fairly clear rules: http://www.mozilla.org/hacking/reviewers.html
(The definitions of "Significant" and "API" are somewhat subjective, though it's impossible to come up with completely objective definitions - IIRC there were long newsgroup threads about this when this version of the policy was created. Maybe more guidelines or concrete examples as part of the policy would be useful.) I agree with you that that policy isn't being followed our enforced consistently across the project currently. "Every patch must have SR" was an easy policy to enforce, this one is much trickier. I don't frankly know how I feel about "the value of SR" today. I'm curious what others think. Gavin On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 4:31 PM, Bobby Holley <bobbyhol...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 3:58 PM, Gavin Sharp <ga...@gavinsharp.com> wrote: > >> Those asides are precisely the reason it's "abuse" :) >> >> We should update the list > > > What is the list good for, exactly? There doesn't seem to be any > consistent usage of it anymore. In the areas that I work on (JS, XPConnect, > DOM, and other internals), it's occasionally used to indicate that the > reviewer is being requested for a more high-level review. But whether the > requestee is on that list never seems all that relevant. > > Put another way - without a clear rule, requesting sr is basically a > judgement call these days. Given that, curating a strict list of potential > requestees doesn't buy us very much. > > bholley >
_______________________________________________ dev-b2g mailing list dev-b2g@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-b2g
