I'm OK with that.
Just make it clear that the sheriff does have authority. One time when I was
sheriff I wanted to revert a broken patch. The author insisted on patching
it over and over. He finally got it working about about seven patches and
nearly three hours or so, when I was insisting on backing it out after the
first 30m.
Avi
On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 5:34 PM, Peter Kasting <pkast...@google.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 2:08 PM, Ojan Vafai <o...@chromium.org> wrote:
>
>> To be clear, here's the proposed policy: Any change that would close the
>> tree can be reverted if it can't be fixed in <2 minutes.
>>
>
> How about:
>
> If a change closes the tree, the change author has 1 or 2 minutes to
> respond to a ping. The change should be reverted if the author doesn't
> respond, if he says to revert, or if he does not say he has a fix within the
> next 5 minutes.
>
> I can't fix _any_ problem in 2 minutes. But I can fix most of them in 5.
> The goal is to allow the author a reasonable chance to fix trivial problems
> before we revert. And I think the tree should go ahead and close during
> that interval.
>
> PK
>
> >
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com
View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe:
http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
