On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 12:33 PM, smaug <sm...@welho.com> wrote: > On 04/26/2016 01:47 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > >> On 2016-04-26 1:02 PM, Mike Hommey wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 10:52:02PM -0400, Boris Zbarsky wrote: >>> >>>> On 4/25/16 10:34 PM, Mike Hommey wrote: >>>> >>>>> Don't we already have that with superreviewers? >>>>> >>>> >>>> Kinda, sorta. >>>> >>>> (How outdated is that list, btw?) >>>>> >>>> >>>> Quite. If we're talking about >>>> https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/governance/policies/reviewers/ >>>> then of >>>> the 30 people on the list, I would say: >>>> >>>> * 10 or 11 are no longer actively involved. >>>> * 4-5 are not actively involved in web-facing bits. >>>> * 2-3 are involved in web-facing bits in a pretty narrow capacity. >>>> >>>> If I were coming up with an "API owners" group, I'd take some of the >>>> people >>>> from this list, but also probably a few who are not on this list.... >>>> >>> >>> Shouldn't we just kind of repurpose the superreviewers, update the list, >>> and keep it fresh? >>> >> >> The traditional job of superreviewers is very different though (and it's >> mostly a historical thing anyway). >> >> > Well, a traditional job for superreviewers is/was things like API reviews, > which isn't that different > from saying what APIs (or other features) should be exposed to the web. > > Updating superreviewer list and repurposing it a bit sounds reasonable to > me. >
OK, sure. I don't have any strong arguments against it! At least the superreviewer list will start to become useful again! :-) -- Ehsan _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
