On Wed, Jul 07, 2010 at 01:56:41AM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > I think this is another problem with pkgdb or Fedora. Why is there a
> > maintainer ("owner"?) and co-maintainers, rather than just having all
> > co-maintainers be equal?
>
It was set up this way because of bugzilla originally. Bugzilla needs to
have an owner. Some teams have taken to using the difference between owner
and comaintainers to establish a triage workflow in bugzilla so we can't
quite get rid of it.
> Good point. I think, just like you, that there should be a list of owners
> rather than just 1 owner.
>
<nod> So one way we might be able to change things is to have a list of
comaintainers:
Package: Foobar
--------
Branch: F-13 Status: Approved
Maintainers: Alfred Watchers: Arnold
Baxter Barry
Carrington Chris
[Apply] [Watch]
[Add User] [Add User]
With a setup like this, the first person in the list is the maintainer in
bugzilla. If that person leaves, the next person in the list becomes the
owner.
One thing that would have to be worked out is whether fine grained acls work
in this scheme or should be dropped. ie: In some places we consider
comaintainers to be anyone with commit. In other places, anyone with
approveacls. The above list idea simplifies the presentation of the acls...
would we want to put people who have both approveacl and commit into the
maitnainers list? Remove the distinction between approveacls and commit?
Something else?
(Also note, not yet volunteering to take this on, just figuring out a way it
could be implemented. If someone else has some coding time, I'd accept
something that is coded along these lines.)
-Toshio
Attachment:
pgpAPnQ0IBnRO.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
