On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 11:02 AM, Alan Perry<Alan.Perry at sun.com> wrote: > sponsored cases with more > significant changes where PSARC members said "why is this a fast-track and > not a self-review".
The key point isn't "significant changes", but rather "what is the existing stability level of the things being changed?" - we do ARC stuff so we can manage the impact and repercussions of the stuff we change. Adding things is easy, as is changing things in compatible ways. Even incompatible changes are easy, as long as they are to things that have low longevity/stability expectations. As you move up the stability levels with incompatible changes, the need for review naturally increases, because the side effects of such changes impacts more and more projects/teams. So maybe the best litmus test is one that captures the difficulty of managing the change once it gets out into the world: "who might be negatively impacted by my change?" - with "none but me" equating to self review, "family and friends, but we can easily deal with it" to "fast track" and "people I don't know well" to "full review". -John
