Hi, An idea came up in Austin of having a "Rust Peers" list.
Because Rust expertise is unevenly spread, sometimes a patch author or patch reviewer might want a Rust expert to review a patch from the point of view of whether it is reasonable Rust code. (E.g. I did this in bug 1423840, where I got glandium to review the patch from a prefs module point of view, and Manish to review the patch from a Rust point of view.) Because this might be a common need, it seems worth formalizing. I have been asking around and the following people have agreed to perform this role. - Alexis Beingessner - Josh Bowman-Matthews - Emilio Cobos Alvarez - Manish Goregaokar - Nika Layzell - Cameron McCormack All of these people have extensive Rust experience. (The list could also be extended, but this is enough people to start.) The question I have is: should this be a Mozilla module? I can see arguments in favour and against it being a module. - In favour: these people do reviews, and the modules list is the canonical place for finding reviewers. - Against: these would be opt-in reviews. If a patch author is confident in their Rust ability, and the "normal" reviewer is likewise confident, then an extra review from a Rust Peer would not be necessary. We already have a "C++/Rust usage, tools, and style" module ( https://wiki.mozilla.org/Modules/All#C.2B.2B.2FRust_usage.2C_tools.2C_and_style) but that feels different to me. If we choose to make this a module, I'm not sure which section of https://wiki.mozilla.org/Modules/All it would fall under. If we choose not to make this a module, I guess this list of people would instead be put onto https://wiki.mozilla.org/Oxidation. What do people think? Thanks. Nick _______________________________________________ governance mailing list governance@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
