On Fri, Jun 02, 2017 at 09:42:48PM +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > Good Morning Everyone, > > With pagure becoming a front-end to dist-git, I have been wondering about the > future of the packager group. > > The packager group is currently used for a few things: > - tracking purpose, it's one of our biggest groups and also one of the most active > - members of the packager group can do official package review > - members of the packager group can become maintainer of a package > > Someone can join this packager group in a few ways: > - Being sponsored by someone after having submitted one or more packages for review > - Being sponsored by someone after having offered to help maintaining a package > (it is then left at the discretion of the sponsor to teach and help the new > packager to our workflow and procedures) > > Currently pagure does not check which group you are in when you log > in, so it has no idea about packager. We could make pagure only > allow people that are in the packager group to log in, but this > would defeat one of the main idea of pagure's type of workflow: > encourage drive-by/one-off contributions. > > With the deprecation of pkgdb2, pagure will make it even easier to > give someone access to a package, if someone wants to help you > maintain a package, you can just grant them access to the project on > pagure. They will only have access to that project and not anything > else. > > We could of course adjust pagure is such a way that it will enforce > being member of the packager group to be allowed to be added to a > project but this seems more pain than gain. (Note: pagure can and > will enforce the FPCA for dist-git) > > So I would like to ask if we are fine with stopping to require the > membership of the packager group to contributors? > > I do not see the packager group disappearing entirely since it will > still be needed for package reviews and we have given rel-eng > tooling to check and enforce this on new package requests, but I > think it makes sense to stop this requirement to commit on dist-git > repos. > > What do you think? The way I see it, this doesn't make maintaines give up control but avoids over-enforcement of controls that may no longer be useful. +1. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ The open source story continues to grow: http://opensource.com _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
