On 04/03/2013 05:22 PM, Alex Keybl wrote:
You seem to be suggesting that the approval process doesn't catch/prevent mistakes. That's just not true. We still get frivolous bugs being nominated for uplift, which points to the fact that these changes would have otherwise been landed without a conversation, and possibly caused blocker regressions. We still find uplift nominations asking for unnecessary string changes late in the cycle. We still get approvals that haven't gone through a UX review. The list of things that we have an eye for goes on and on.
Is everyone making these mistakes? It seems like there may be people with significant mozilla development experience like jlebar, roc, etc. who can be granted 'a=' authority and trusted to know when their own judgement is sufficient and when they need to ask for approval.
And I think assuming that everyone asking for approval would have landed the bugs without asking is wrong. I know I've asked for approval for patches with l10n changes because of situations similar to how *partners are even now still requesting features on v1.0.1 that require new strings*. (At those points in time the flag situation was different to how it is now.) Obviously, unnecessary string changes are different from completely new strings, but I know when it became clear that our string freeze was a beautiful dream detached from reality, I stopped obsessing about minor string changes slipping through.
Andrew _______________________________________________ dev-b2g mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-b2g
