On Mon, Dec 09, 2019 at 05:35:58PM +0100, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > On Mon, Dec 09, 2019 at 05:18:32PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > It would be nice if we would implement "approval" system while doing > > this. Like if you set somebody as override, that person must click > > "accept". Same way to change it, the old person must click "accept". > > I'm trying to think how this would work for groups and pseudo users. > For the later this should work fine, except that potentially several people > would receive the confirmation link. > For the former, it's bit more tricky but it would be one way where we could > ensure that the group is correctly set-up in FAS (with an mailing list address). > > It's a bit more work than anticipated though, but should be doable. Thinking some more about this and while I think we should aim for this process, considering the gain we would have from just moving away from fedora-scm-requests (nicer UX, easier sync to bugzilla of the information, no need to clone that large git repo). Would we be ok with a phased release where at first one the main admin (and infra/releng) would be able to the set the overrides? >From there we could see if we need this approval system and if we do, who can trigger changing it. Does that sound reasonable or would you rather we land the entire change at one? (knowing that we're close to completion with Phase #1, we just need to tweak it based on the feedback we're collecting in this thread while phase #2 was not scoped at all). Thanks for your inputs, Pierre _______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
