Hi everyone,

As I am working on bringing pagure as a front-end to our dist-git, a question is
troubling me.

Currently ACLs are stored in pkgdb, it allows having a per-branch ACL model,
which in itself is quite cool, but I wonder: is it that useful?

I know pkgdb brings us other things too and I am explicitely ignoring them here
because I think we can find solutions for them, which may even have benefits
over our current processes.

So, does per-branch ACLs make sense to you? Have you had cases where you thought
it was good/bad? More importantly, have you had cases where you would want to 
give
someone access to just one branch and really really do *not* want them to have
access to the other branches?

Of course, EPEL vs Fedora comes to mind here, but I wonder: if the EPEL 
maintainer
has also commit on the Fedora branches, is it really that much of a big deal?
And vice-versa?

Before I investigate what it would take to drop pkgdb entirely and let pagure
handle the ACLs, I wanted to hear from you if you think this is a terrible idea
or worth investigating.


Thanks in advance for your feedbacks and ideas,
Pierre


PS: for full disclosure: pagure does not support per branch ACLs at the moment
and in the current way we are syncing information from pkgdb to pagure, we are
only taking rawhide into account. So if you have commit on rawhide, you will
have commit access on pagure to all branches, if you do not have commit access
on rawhide, you won't have commit access on pagure.
Note that this concerns only commit access via the UI and the ability to merge
PR as gitolite underneath (used when doing git push via ssh) still per branch
ACLs.

PS2: I am also considering this question having in mind the change in branching
model the modularity work will bring (ie: branch no longer tied to a Fedora
version but rather to upstream's version)

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Reply via email to