-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Aryeh Gregor wrote:
Bureaucrats can also add people. I'm assuming
that people who have
had commit access for a reasonably long time and have shown they know
how to use it should be marked coders, but I'm still really uncertain
given that nobody's actually said what the various statuses are
supposed to actually mean. Are people going to actually scap on the
basis of nothing other than the fact that every commit is marked
ok/resolved? If so, it's probably a bad idea for people other than
Tim or Brion to add those markings, at least on a regular basis,
unless we really want that.
The current theory is we'd like it to be easy to mark things as needing
*more* review, but hard to mark things as needing *less* review.
So that probably means a split-level permissions model, perhaps with
distinct pre-review and super-review (to use the Mozilla term -- patch
reviews get "super-reviewed" by a core committer, or some such crazy thing).
It is, of course, an evolving system. :)
- -- brion
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----