>> True, if what you're really asking for is not just a bug report but also a >> "cooling off period" during which you wait for a result from the EWS bot, >> even if you get a review right away. You get greater value in the case of a >> bad patch, but also greater cost in the case of every patch. > > Yes, this way of doing things has more overhead for you personally but > saves overhead for everyone else in the project. The question, as I > see it, is which of these quantities is larger. The more people that > work on the project, the bigger the multiplier on the right.
I don't think it's fair to frame my perspective as "me personally" and your perspective as "everyone else in the project." It's interesting that I caught just as much flak from Eric today for turning the buildbot red, even though the bot was red for only a short time, the bot was only red because of a 32-bit / 64-bit difference that didn't show up in my 32-bit testing, and my patch had a bugzilla bug. My guess is that the real complaint here is that the bot was red at all. If you'll permit me to editorialize, my guess is that some Google employees prefer a rigid green tree policy because it matches their internal development process, and it makes integrating with that process and committing patches for other Google employees easier. The rigid green tree policy you seek would make some things easier. It would also impose costs on everyone in the project. It is definitely not obvious that everyone on the project shares your preference. Geoff _______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
