On 02 Jun 2007 12:39:16 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > Kevin and I (both community people with no ties to Red Hat) simply > asked for more access and it was granted to us, so I don't see any > institutional denial of CVS or buildsys access. If you (or anyone > else) needs access to a package they've been locked out of, just ask > for it. (It should suffice to make a regular CVS admin request and > explain the situation.) That's impracticable, because as a sponsor I would like to be able to "go in" any time and apply changes without having to request assistance from a cvs admin first. This has worked before without anyone complaining, ever. Listen, I used to be the community sponsor with the most community sponsorees (even without the 1-2 that are not connected to my account officially due to early problems with the old FAS). That has shifted a tiny bit, but there are still 17 contributors sponsored by my account. As long as a sponsor's responsibilities remain unclear and the access privileges are taken away, too, the motivation to continue with sponsoring is reduced dramatically. CVS admin access is something that was offered to me several weeks ago for helping with processing the endless stream of branch requests. I didn't accept because it is something anybody else can do, too. Btw, I'm not surprised that special privileges are distributed among FESCo members. There used to be a plan on taking away privileges from people who leave FESCo. > I am not sufficiently informed as to which > types of koji access are available. There's only admin access afaik. But as the Extras signers are being obsoleted with the new rel-eng group, things are shifting away from the community here, too. Also, in the past, admin access to plague has not been given either. I've asked once about it, but don't know who exactly decided that it would not be necessary. > MS> [...] after years there still is no team that could step in and > MS> apply emergency fixes. > > Well, speaking as someone who has done just that, I'm not exactly sure > what you think is lacking here. "not exactly" or "not at all"? Realization of old plans is lacking. I see no such team. I see bottlenecks all over the place. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
