On Mon, Jul 11, 2016, at 04:26 PM, Martin Thomson wrote: > On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 2:18 PM, Xidorn Quan <m...@upsuper.org> wrote: > > I also use checkin-needed for small changes which I don't think it's > > worth to run a full testset for, to save some infra resources. > > Hmm, that's an odd optimization. I'd have thought that sheriff time > is more valuable than infra.
So I only use it when I feel pretty confident that it wouldn't need further care and unlikely cause any conflict. Sheriff time is indeed more valuable than infra, but long backlog on infra may take sheriffs more time to handle as well, which could be more expensive than checking in a small patch. It seems to me there was still some bottleneck on our infra which could cause significant backlog when there are lots of pushes. Test machine for Windows and macOS, presumably? > On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 2:48 PM, Nils Ohlmeier <nohlme...@mozilla.com> > wrote: > > Another use case for checkin-needed are probably sec bugs, as you can’t use > > mozreview for them AFAIK. > > As for sec-critical bugs, as long as the change is going to hit the > tree with the bug number in it, then I don't see why it can't go via > mozreview. Because we don't want to reveal details before we are comfortable with disclosing them. It can go via MozReview *after* a patch is reviewed and gets sec-approval, but not the reverse. - Xidorn _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
