What do you mean by "that"? Updating the doc? Btw, the original reason why I asked was that I wanted to confirm we all agreed with this policy. I guess it sounds like everyone does and the only question is making sure everyone starts following it?
J On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 11:28 AM, Dimitri Glazkov <[email protected]>wrote: > Yaar and I discussed making changes to that effect last week, he's > working on that. > > :DG< > > On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 10:33 AM, David Levin <[email protected]> wrote: > > If it isn't written > > here http://dev.chromium.org/developers/how-tos/webkit-merge-1, then > (imo) > > it isn't policy for gardener. :) Given that not everyone is in the same > > place, if it isn't written in the standard place, how will folks know? > > Even then, if you add something new, it would be nice to tell folks b/c > I'm > > sure not everyone checks that every time they start gardening. > > dave > > On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 10:25 AM, Jeremy Orlow <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 10:19 AM, David Levin <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> That sounds like a reasonable policy. > >> > >> Hmm...I thought this was the policy. I guess not? :-) > >> > >>> > >>> There is the current idea of figuring out something about the crash > >>> before filing a bug, which clashes with this idea. > >>> What text would you add > >>> to http://dev.chromium.org/developers/how-tos/webkit-merge-1 to tell > how to > >>> deal with these? Here's one idea (add it in red?): > >>> > >>> If you must roll WebKit DEPS and pick up new crashers, you should enter > >>> an individual bug for each new crasher immediately and make it P0. > >>> > >>> Then what about assigning. Does it go to the unlucky webkit gardener > who > >>> happened to have the duty that day? (If they have another day of > gardening, > >>> then these bug linger.) > >> > >> If the gardener has time, sure. If not, maybe assign it to whomever > makes > >> the most sense. And, when there's no obvious candidate, they can draft > >> someone. (In general, I think we should empower gardeners to draft > people > >> when there are lots of high prioirity items stacking up and/or we get > really > >> behind ToT.) > >>> > >>> On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 9:23 AM, Jeremy Orlow <[email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Today I noticed a bunch of recently added CRASH test expectations for > >>>> layout tests. I know that we sometimes have to roll in a crasher or > two, > >>>> but aren't we supposed to be filing p0-p1, dev channel release > blockers at > >>>> least until we can prove the crash is not exploitable in the browser > and > >>>> ideally not before the crash is fixed?? > >>>> Btw: > >>>> $ grep CRASH test_expectations.txt | egrep -v '^//' | wc -l > >>>> 56 > >>>> And many of them are fairly new. > >>>> J > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Chromium Developers mailing list: [email protected] View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
