I have no issues with the process, but only concerned with the way this change was made. The issue keeps referring to https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=55584 for "details", but there is nothing there except statements asserting how much of a "big problem" this is.
I think this is a bigger problem with large open source projects in general where implementors are oblivious to which functionalities developers cherish and value. Any change in such features would require a more thorough explanation.
It may be an issue of having multiple channels of communication, and the bug tracker is only one of them.
For example, though I work for Mozilla, I'm not terribly good at keeping up with the mailing lists, so every so often something pops up in Bugzilla (which I read more frequently) that seems to have come out of nowhere.
And of course stuff happens in our IRC channels that never makes it to a bug; same with internal emails. There's a lot of effort involved in making sure your communication is clear and accessible when you have several different modes of it.
This is very similar to issues in W3C specifications. I just think a bug tracker should be the primary reference material to track discussions around a specific bug. I wish there was a way to link to IRC channel discussion around this bug and otherwise if possible.
But nevertheless, I think it would be better if implementors summarize discussions outside of the bug tracker into the issue itself.
I think this is a bigger problem with large open source projects in general where implementors are oblivious to which functionalities developers cherish and value. Any change in such features would require a more thorough explanation.