> > >> On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 10:59 PM, Nicholas Nethercote < > n.netherc...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On the other hand, I'm more optimistic than bholley about the per-bug > >> delegation. Given that it's been implemented I'd suggest using it and > >> if reviewers do tend to forget it then consider implementing a broader > >> mechanism. > >> > > > > To be clear: I think it would probably work ok, but still worse than the > alternative I'm proposing (which requires no additional engineering), and I > don't see how it is advantageous, (since, per my original email, it seems > like we should give someone delegation in any given PR i.f.f. we should > give them delegation in every PR). >
I think I largely agree. We give our L3 access to mozilla-inbound fairly freely, and I'm not aware of any instances of abuse. That seems to argue against investing too much into technical solutions to something that might well be a non-issue on a social level. If a technical solution seems important (and I'm not saying there aren't any argument for that), perhaps ever getting an r+ in a PR means that the author can from then on do "@bors-servo: r=reviewer" and have that accepted? Only for people in a whitelist (perhaps the same as for try access, so sort of a level 1 access), and revocable with r-, I suppose. _______________________________________________ dev-servo mailing list dev-servo@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-servo
