On Friday 2018-04-20 14:23 -0700, Kris Maglione wrote: > For a lot of these patches, my opinion is only really critical for certain > architectural aspects, or implementation aspects at a few critical points. > There are other reviewers who are perfectly qualified to do a more detailed > review of the specifics of the patch, and have more spare cycles to devote > to it. Essentially, what's needed from me in these cases is a super-review, > which I can do fairly easily, but instead I become a bottleneck for the code > review as well. > > So, for the areas where I have this responsibility, I'd like to institute a > policy that certain types of changes need a final super-review from me, but > should get a detailed code review from another qualified reviewer when that > makes sense.
I think it's reasonable to use the super-review flag for this sort of high-level or design review, at least until we come up with a better name for it (and make a new flag, and retire the old one). I don't think the super-review policy (as written) is meaningful today. -David -- ๐ L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ ๐ ๐ข Mozilla https://www.mozilla.org/ ๐ Before I built a wall I'd ask to know What I was walling in or walling out, And to whom I was like to give offense. - Robert Frost, Mending Wall (1914)
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
