Why not just actually audit each app? Surely there's a way to diff the changes and only have reviewers consider those. For issues like the one cited (free trial CC requirement), that seems very easy to check, especially if the payments are integrated with Apple. So v1 didn't have any CC entry stuff, gets approved + catalogued by Apple as having the free trial w/no CC attribute. V2 comes along, reviewer sees visual diffs, ooh hey there's a CC entry form now, re-check trial flow, reject v2, record this.
I'm definitely oversimplifying, but is that not at least close to how it works?
The trouble is that these things don't always get caught. In the example, the statements were there before and after In-App Purchase was implemented. It wasn't until some reviewer for another completely-unrelated change saw that text and decided it was a problem. The time between the newly-decided "violation" and the last review is measured in years.
As a developer, you add notes telling the reviewer what has changed but this doesn't stop the reviewer from scanning through everything looking for either overlooked issues or newly-emphasized rule interpretations.
[+] [-] seanp2k2|9 years ago|reply
I'm definitely oversimplifying, but is that not at least close to how it works?
[+] [-] bmedenwald|9 years ago|reply
As a developer, you add notes telling the reviewer what has changed but this doesn't stop the reviewer from scanning through everything looking for either overlooked issues or newly-emphasized rule interpretations.
[+] [-] dhoerl|9 years ago|reply