Le 03/04/2013 23:22, Alex Keybl a écrit : > >> But I also don't think you're responding to my main point, which is >> that not only are uplift requests distracting, they contribute little >> value, because engineers almost always get the outcome they want. > You seem to be suggesting that the approval process doesn't catch/prevent > mistakes. That's just not true. We still get frivolous bugs being nominated > for uplift, which points to the fact that these changes would have otherwise > been landed without a conversation, and possibly caused blocker regressions. > We still find uplift nominations asking for unnecessary string changes late > in the cycle. We still get approvals that haven't gone through a UX review. > The list of things that we have an eye for goes on and on. > > Then there's the whole set of bugs which aren't nominated for uplift because > there wasn't good enough reason to land, but which may have landed > unnecessarily otherwise.
Actually I've seen some bugs that should have been asked for approval but weren't. For these bugs that I knew they needed to be uplifted, (or that Vivien asked me to watch) I personally had to ask for approval so that they eventually get uplifted. (just to add some weight to what David is saying). -- Julien
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ dev-b2g mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-b2g
