1 |
On 02/08/2019 22.55, Michał Górny wrote: |
2 |
> Add two new maintainer types: 'proxied' for proxied maintainers, |
3 |
> and 'watcher' for people who wish to be CC-ed on bugs but are not |
4 |
> maintainers (e.g. upstream developers). |
5 |
|
6 |
Can't we solve this simply in the bug tracker? The monitor setting of a |
7 |
user does not belong into the tree. |
8 |
|
9 |
|
10 |
The upstream maintainer and all other "watchers" have no write access to |
11 |
the tree so they will consume manpower in adding and removing their |
12 |
contacts to packages. |
13 |
|
14 |
The perfect solution would be that any user can add a watch filter to |
15 |
my-cat/mypkg in the bugtracker. |
16 |
|
17 |
Between 2018-01-01 and 2018-12-31 we received and assigned 31280 bugs. |
18 |
I am no fan of the descriptions in the form "please CC: If the bug is |
19 |
about x but not y and the moon is in the third house of the lion" |
20 |
|
21 |
This consumes extra time for every assignment and prevents automagic |
22 |
assignment in future. We should rather keep it simple instead of |
23 |
extending the options. |
24 |
|
25 |
|
26 |
> +There are four defined maintainer types: |
27 |
> + |
28 |
> +person |
29 |
> + Indicates a maintainer that is not a project, and has commit access |
30 |
> + to the repository. |
31 |
> + |
32 |
> +proxied |
33 |
> + Indicates a proxied maintainer, i.e. a maintainer that does not have |
34 |
> + direct commit access and needs a proxy to commit the changes. |
35 |
> + |
36 |
> +watcher |
37 |
> + Indicates a non-maintainer that wishes to be CC-ed on bug reports, |
38 |
> + e.g. a upstream developer. |
39 |
> + |
40 |
> +project |
41 |
> + Indicates a maintainer that is a project defined in ``projects.xml``. |
42 |
|
43 |
|
44 |
I think different "objects" should not be stored in one variable. |
45 |
"Person" or "Proxied" means here write_access=TRUE/FALSE |
46 |
"Project" means a group of developers |
47 |
"Watcher" means let Bugzilla send notifications |
48 |
|
49 |
|
50 |
|
51 |
"Person": We should name people without write access persons too... at |
52 |
least in public ;-) |
53 |
|
54 |
|
55 |
We should not introduce "watchers" as long our upstream fields in the |
56 |
metadata are out of date or not set at all. |
57 |
|
58 |
|
59 |
> +Previously, proxied maintainers were distinguished by not having a Gentoo e-mail |
60 |
> +address. However, nowadays we have developers without direct Gentoo repository |
61 |
> +commit access as maintainers. |
62 |
|
63 |
(formerly known as staffers) |
64 |
these few can use their non gentoo mail, if they do not want to do the quiz. |
65 |
But I think, if someone has done the staffer quiz and is very active on |
66 |
the ebuilds it makes most sense to go for the write access. |
67 |
|
68 |
|
69 |
> +There is also no reason to assume that |
70 |
> +in the future we would not have developers using non-Gentoo e-mail addresses. |
71 |
> +Adding explicit notation for proxied maintainers resolves that problem. |
72 |
|
73 |
This would make it impossible to see outside of Gentoo, who is who. I |
74 |
think users have a slightly higher trust in a maintainer with |
75 |
foo@g.o than superhero1234@××××××××.cc |
76 |
|
77 |
-- |
78 |
Best, |
79 |
Jonas |