On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 8:49 PM, Justin Lebar <[email protected]> wrote: > Another question/suggestion about this process: > > Basically any b2g bug will need either approval-aurora or > blocking-basecamp. Otherwise it's effectively b2g v2 work, and nobody > is working on v2 at the moment. > > If I have a bug that's not a basecamp blocker that I'd like to get > into b2g, this means that I have to wait for an Aurora triage session > before I can land it and have it available on Aurora. I expect we > will soon modify our main b2g repository to point at mozilla-aurora > instead of mozilla-central (since we won't be shipping mozilla-central > v19 in b2g v1), which means that no other b2g devs will get my change > until it lands on Aurora. > > Will be running mozilla-aurora triage once a day? Otherwise, how long > should I expect to wait before I can land non-blockers on > mozilla-aurora? > > In order to meet our deadline, it's critical that we be able to share > patches with others quickly. If I have to wait days to get my > non-basecamp-blocking bugs landed on Aurora, that will slow us down to > an unacceptable level. > > We do b2g triage once a day. If we can't do Aurora triage once a day, > perhaps we can add a b2g-v1-approval flag which is equivalent to a > fast-tracked aurora-approval flag. (Even better, b2g-v1-approval > could go on the bug, instead of on the patch, which would further > reduce lag before landing.)
I absolutely agree that we need to have a very quick turnaround time for getting approvals. One thing that might help is to give aurora-approval powers to everyone that has basecamp-blocking powers. That way we can go through b2g related aurora-approval nominations while we do the normal triage, which happens every day. / Jonas _______________________________________________ dev-b2g mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-b2g
