On Saturday 2012-11-24 18:06 -0800, Justin Dolske wrote: > On 11/6/12 10:09 AM, Dave Townsend wrote: > >We've had a policy requiring super-review for certain kinds of patches > >for a long time. It's changed a couple of times but the current policy > >(http://www.mozilla.org/hacking/reviewers.html) primarily requires > >super-review for any patch that introduces or changes an API. > > I think we should consider jettisoning/rewriting that part of the > policy. It doesn't match what we've been doing in reality(*), and we > don't seem to be in a terrible state as a result. > > A bit of data: by my crude Bugzilla search, I count 104 sr+'d bugs > that have been fixed in the last 3 months. (http://is.gd/45WAxl) By > product: > > Core - 75 > Toolkit - 9 > Mailnews - 8 > NSS+NSPR - 6 > TB+SM+CM - 6 > > (*) Core's pretty clearly still using sr+, so if it's working and > they want to keep it that's just fine. I direct my comments at > Toolkit and Firefox.
I would not interpret this as showing that sr is working in Core; by the definition of what requires sr, I expect at least a decimal order of magnitude more patches should have had sr. (I think in practice, when the policy changed to forbid r+sr from one reviewer, we mostly stopped using sr as a result.) -David -- 𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂 𝄢 Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂 _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
