On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 07:52:43PM -0800, John Poelstra wrote: > Adam Williamson wrote: >> On Tue, 2009-03-03 at 15:42 -0500, TK009 wrote: >> >>> * (SOP) Standard Operating Procedures - General discussion began on >>> creation of SOP's for the BugZappers, and that they should be created >>> concurrently with the wiki update. Then focused on SOP for joining/new >>> members of the BugZappers. Specifically the "introduction e-mail". No >>> decission was reached during the meeting regarding procedure. >> >> This is an area which came in for some contention during the meeting. >> Let's have some follow up :) >> >> To recap for people who weren't at the meeting: >> >> Myself and John would like to make it a standard requirement for new >> triagers to post a short mail to the mailing list just to introduce >> themselves. The intent of this is multiple. First, it acts as a basic >> bot check - this is important, as joining fedorabugs group gives you >> wide Bugzilla powers, so we don't want bots to get it. >> >> Second, it's a good way to make newcomers feel involved right away, and >> make sure the rest of the group knows about them. We actually had about >> ten new members in the fedorabugs group last week, but most current >> triagers wouldn't know that because there's currently nothing that has >> them introduce themselves to the rest of the group. > > Third, it makes our job easier because then we know who to approve for > 'fedorabugs' vs. every single notification we get. It is my > understanding that packagers get 'fedorabugs' too, but I'm not sure how > it is granted or requested. I asked the admins: [05 Mar 10:53] <stickster> Question for anyone... 'fedorabugs' group membership is, I believe, implied by 'packager' group membership -- how does that work exactly? [05 Mar 10:53] <stickster> By which I mean, does FAS have an understanding of group membership dependencies? [05 Mar 10:55] <mmcgrath> stickster: implied? [05 Mar 10:55] <mmcgrath> packager might require fedorabugs. [05 Mar 10:55] <mmcgrath> it'd just mean someone has to be in fedorabugs before they can be in packager. [05 Mar 10:55] <nirik> I thought packager automagically added fedorabugs now. [05 Mar 10:55] <nirik> but I don't know how it does that. [05 Mar 10:56] <stickster> nirik: Yeah, that's what I was looking for but didn't say it very well. I'm trying to find out if, when someone is added to 'packager', they are automatically added to 'fedorabugs'. [05 Mar 10:56] <nirik> yes, I think that is the case. ;) [05 Mar 10:57] <mmcgrath> if it does that, not even I know how that mechanism works :) -- 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/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
Attachment:
pgpDB9qrqvQ2J.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- fedora-test-list mailing list fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list
