+1
- jst
On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 8:33 PM, Eric Shepherd (Sheppy)
wrote:
> +1 and huzzah!
>
> --
> Eric Shepherd
> Senior Technical Writer
> Mozilla Developer Network
> Blog: https://www.bitstampede.com/
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/sheppy
> Doodle: http://doodle.com/the.sheppy
>
> On Aug 2, 201
I sent this post to dev.planning, firefox-dev and governance earlier
this evening, but didn't seem to land here, so am resending to .governance
mitchell
ideal followup is governance ... cross posting to reach those likely to
be interested
I'm currently the owner of the Commit Access Policy m
On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 8:20 PM, Mitchell Baker wrote:
> ideal followup is governance ... cross posting to reach those likely to be
> interested
>
> I'm currently the owner of the Commit Access Policy module. That's
> because I wrote the original policy and did what was necessary to get it
> impl
Over time we've made a series of exceptions to the level 3 requirements
for Sheriffs and this proposal addresses that.
The current Policy for level 3 is:
Level 3 - Core Product Access
Requirements: two vouchers - module owners or peers of code stored at
this level
The iss
Ah yes, good point. For me personally, there's very little that's
contentious about adapting our policies to reflect changing engineering
practices. When I wrote a bunch of our original policies many years
back, they were a reflection of actual practice at the time with our
aspirations. So u
