We had a discussion of layout bug triage at our Layout/Graphics meet-up in Paris.
The concerns I had that led to the discussion were: * I'm worried that in some cases we fail to get regressions triaged quickly, which is important both so that we don't ship them, and so that the person who wrote the patch that caused them still remembers the patch well. * I'm worried that we're duplicating effort in reading bugmail. We didn't come to a whole lot of conclusions, but the one we did reach is that one way we can acknowledge having read a bug and noticed that it doesn't seem like any other immediate action is needed is by setting the priority field. This should probably use the priorities as described in http://dbaron.org/log/20090120-bug-priorities if we want to be consistent, but that isn't even critical as the more important part is having something approximate as an acknowledgment that the bug has been looked at. That said, other actions should be taken if they are useful, such as marking dependencies, cc:ing or needinfo?ing relevant people, or describing the code where the problem is likely to be. -David -- 𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂 𝄢 Mozilla https://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂 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: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ dev-tech-layout mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-layout
