Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Marius Mauch <genone@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: About herds and their non-existant use
Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 13:15:30
Message-Id: 20080523151123.5f610451.genone@gentoo.org
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Re: About herds and their non-existant use by "Tiziano Müller"
1 On Thu, 22 May 2008 08:05:07 +0200
2 Tiziano Müller <dev-zero@g.o> wrote:
3
4 > While I think the herds concecpt is somewhat useless, I'd rather like
5 > to see something like this instead:
6 >
7 > <maintainer>
8 > <team>foobar</team>
9 > </maintainer>
10 >
11 > This makes it clear that it is a team instead of a person (where
12 > <name> would have been used)
13 >
14 > And the herds.xml isn't completely useless, but I'd rather name it
15 > teams.xml and list the teams there. This way we can validated the
16 > team mentioned in <team>...</team> against the list of available
17 > teams and make sure the complete thing is valid (can be done in the
18 > current metadata.dtd or in a future metadata.xsd).
19 > (If we're gonna re-use the <email>...</email> element for the
20 > herd-alias, we can never validate it. And I'm personally for the: "if
21 > something can be automatically validated, it should be")
22
23 Hmm, in that case maybe it's be possible to use a similar system for
24 devs, e.g.
25 <maintainer>
26 <dev>genone</dev>
27 </maintainer>
28 and only use the <email> element for non-dev maintainers and upstream
29 contacts. Anyway, as long as we use the same tag to list both
30 individual and group maintainers it would be an improvement IMO.
31
32 > >> This would have a number of benefits:
33 > >> - you no longer have to look at herds.xml to determine the actual
34 > >> maintainers of a given package (as herd-name and associated mail
35 > >> alias don't always match)
36 > I don't consider this much of a problem. You just have to know
37 > xsl/xpath to cope with this as generating the list of mail-aliases to
38 > assign this bug to is a simple xsl-transformation...
39 > When we use XML we can also use the right tools to handle them, can't
40 > we?
41
42 My point is that it's an unneccessary extra step Sometimes you only
43 have the raw XML file. Anyway, that's maybe more of a policy problem,
44 we just need to enforce 'name == mail alias' (or would that be such a
45 horrible requirement?)
46
47 > >> - it would simplify bug assignment rules, as the current case
48 > >> where a package has both a <herd> and a <maintainer> tag in
49 > >> metadata.xml no longer exists
50 > It doesn't. You can still have more than one <maintainer> in there.
51 > We'd have to introduce an attribute to mark the primary maintainer.
52
53 Relying on the order of <maintainer> elements doesn't work because ...?
54 (Assign to first listed maintainer, CC others)
55
56 > >> - only have one location where members of a given team are listed,
57 > >> currently it's possible and quite likely that herds.xml and the
58 > >> mail alias files get out of sync
59 > Well, we need one location where the name of the team is mapped to the
60 > actual mail-alias. But I don't get what you're trying to say...
61
62 Why do you need to separate the name from the alias? Sure, sometimes
63 there are technical reasons why you can't use your preferred name as
64 mail alias (when it matches a system account), but then you can just
65 adjust your name a bit (e.g. adding some suffix).
66 Don't know if you're aware of this, but the separation of herd names
67 and aliases of the herd maintainers has always been something that
68 bug-wranglers complained about.
69 But my main issue is that currently we have multiple unconnected
70 locations where teams are defined, some more and some less important:
71 - herds.xml
72 - project pages
73 - mail aliases
74 - cvs access groups
75 - role definitions in ldap/roll-call
76 So when someone wants to change his roles there are a lot of places to
77 care about, and it's likely that one or more are forgotten and things
78 get out of sync, so you have different views of who actually belongs to
79 a group depending on what source you use. Don't know if it has improved
80 in the last years, but it used to happen quite often that herds.xml was
81 completely out of sync with reality simply because it didn't
82 really affect anything (now that jeeves is using it it's probably
83 become a bit better).
84 Ideally we could list that information in just one authorative
85 location, but that's not feasable for technical reasons, but if we can
86 eliminate one source (or auto-generate it from another source) the
87 problem is already reduced quite a bit. And herds.xml is IMO the most
88 likely candidates for that, but there are of course also other ways to
89 improve the situation.
90
91 Marius
92 --
93 gentoo-dev@l.g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
[gentoo-dev] Re: Re: About herds and their non-existant use "Tiziano Müller" <dev-zero@g.o>
[gentoo-dev] Re: Re: About herds and their non-existant use "Tiziano Müller" <dev-zero@g.o>