www-infrastructure-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Chris Lambertus (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (INFRA-12165) Suggestion to simplify podling group maintenance
Date Mon, 27 Jun 2016 03:40:52 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-12165?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15350389#comment-15350389
] 

Chris Lambertus commented on INFRA-12165:
-----------------------------------------

I don't disagree on your approach or your idea. I'm going to +1 it on the infra@ list, but
we still don't have an actionable ticket here. We really need to keep infra tickets to items
which have an actionable content. 

> Suggestion to simplify podling group maintenance
> ------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: INFRA-12165
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-12165
>             Project: Infrastructure
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: LDAP
>            Reporter: Sebb
>
> Back in the days when SVN was used for asf-authorization, it was pretty easy for PPMC
mentors and others to update the list of podling members. Just update the file in SVN.
> Infra only needed to get involved if a serious mistake was made with the edit that caused
problems for SVN.
> The process now involves the following
> 1) asf-authorization is updated in a (new) Git branch
> 2) Infra is asked to merge the pull request
> 3) Request is merged to deployment branch
> [4) delete the branch if a new one was used]
> At least two people are involved, including one from Infra.
> Once a podling becomes a TLP, updating the committer list no longer needs Infra involvement,
as the chair can update the groups directly. And the process is much less error-prone as each
group is independent and easier to amend.
> I'm suggesting that the same process is adopted for podlings; i.e. rather than use a
list defined directly in asf-authorization, Infra would create the LDAP Unix group and add
it to asf-auth.
> I realise that this was not done in SVN days because of the extra overhead of creating
the LDAP group, but IMO  the Git process has changed the balance.
> If a podling retires, then at some point the LDAP group has to be dropped, but unless
the podling made no changes to its list then Infra involvement will have been reduced overall.
And if a podling graduates, the work is reduced, because there is no need to replace the list
in asf-auth with an LDAP group.
> There is one aspect that might need to be addressed: karma for updating the unix group.
At present this is restricted to pmc-chairs. Since there are likely to be several chairs on
the IPMC, that might be sufficient. Podlings would need to request an update on the IPMC list.
(Or maybe ASF members could also be granted write access to the Unix groups to increase the
work pool.)



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Mime
View raw message