On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 06:04:38PM +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote: > On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 08:37:29AM -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > > > > There was a meeting at one point (I think FESCo but I could be wrong) > > where the cvsadmin groups was given responsibility for putting new > > members in cvsadmin. I believe that this technically covers all the > > groups except secondary arches -- who have the same powers but different > > groups and different responsibilities. > > > > Just pointing out the history; not necessarily what should be. > > It is somehow odd to have a complex trust system with many levels > of control (roughly packager -> provenpackager -> sponsor) for > contributors that have less power, while there is no apparent > control/procedure for the cvsadmin group. At least people having > cvsadmin powers granted should be provenpackagers, and maybe > cvsadmin members could be identified and something about them > could be added in the policies pages, be it only a mention to an > informal process to become cvsadmin. To answer to myself, now that I stand corrected, cvsadmin is outside of the packager trust system, and in the infras trust system, so it is right as is (more precisely I don't have an opinion on it). -- Pat -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
