On 21.08.2007 17:59, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >> On 21.08.2007 14:24, Dmitry Butskoy wrote: >>> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >>>> * mail-notification -- Mail Notification is a status icon that >>>> informs you if you have new mail >>> I'm interested to co-maintain this one. Request to pkgdb is done. >> And approved for watchbugzilla, watchcommits and commit already. :-) >> Note that I didn't give you "approveacls" permissions -- from looking at >> some other packages it looks to me that "only the owner has >> approveacls-permissions" is the commonly used scheme (at least afaics). > > The owner of a package essentially has all of the acls listed on the > packagedb page. If you want a comaintainer to have all of the powers > that you do, grant them everything that is there (including > approveacls). If you want them to be able to do anything except approve > other people's acl requests (make new comaintainers, etc) give them > everything except approveacls. Which is what I did. ;-) > The reason there are many packages which have everything except > approveacls is because of how the import script decided on acls for > packages. If you were a comaintainer in owners.list, you were added to > all of the acls. If you were listed in pkg.acl, you received commit and > watchcommit. If you were a CCList member in owners.list, you got > watchcommit and watchbugzilla. thx for explaining this. > Owners and comaintainers are welcome to change things however they see fit. Well, is there any official suggestion/recommendation from us/FESCo how to handle it? For me it sounds the best if we normally leave approveacls up to the primary maintainer, as its his job to coordinate the different maintainers, so it might be good to leave this job to him normally. But I don't care much (and maybe it's not even worth discussing) CU knurd -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
