This case sounds like it would be best handled with a sub-module, which is something the module owner (rjesup) can create to effectively govern a subset of a module. Creation and ownership of sub-modules are entirely within the module owner's discretion as part of the general principle that the module may delegate reviews and responsibility by whatever criteria they deem appropriate.
-- Mike On 2013-04-04, at 2:57 PM, [email protected] wrote: > Hi Everyone, > > One issue we're running into right now with WebRTC code management is the > fact that Henrik and I can effectively do reviews on automation behind the > WebRTC APIs, but can't do reviews on the underlying core code in that area. > However, in the module ownership definition for WebRTC right now, our review > wouldn't sufficient right now to land tests per what's defined in the WebRTC > module, even though there's acceptance from the team that we could provide > the "checkmark" to allow something to land on the tests side. > > How should we handle this per module ownership structure? Should I nominate > myself and Henrik as peers for automated tests within the WebRTC module only? > Or is there some other process I need to follow here? > > Sincerely, > Jason Smith > _______________________________________________ > governance mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
_______________________________________________ governance mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
