Okay, it sounds like there's decent consensus. How much of this cleanup can I take care of before the PMC meets?
Everyone fine if I do the earlier pruning we talked about and look into the "anyone is assignable" bit? On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 12:38 PM, Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> wrote: > > I think Jira management should be left to the committers. One can pretty > much mess up a release, and make it hard to account for what's in and > what's not when jiras are changed the around (the ultimate truth can be > reconstructed from the git commit records, but that's tedious). > > I agree we should avoid allowing contributors to change JIRA metadata if > this is possible to restrict. Our commit log conventions aren't universally > followed, due to human error, so they are not all tagged with issue > identifiers, or the correct identifier. > > > I'm conflicted on this bit. Incrementally giving people more responsibility is our best path to good decisions wrt new committers. I think it makes sense to not give every new contributor the ability to set fix versions. On the other hand, I'm sure there will be folks that I trust to accurately set that metadata before they become committers. And what about folks who contribute by helping to clean up said jira metadata? When y'all discuss this, could someone please advocate a middle ground where we no longer default to all contributors get metadata edit rights, but we maintain a jira role that can be granted at the discretion of existing jira admins (or commiters, or PMC or whatever y'all are comfortable with)? -- Sean
