On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 5:18 PM, Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net> wrote: > > On Jan 16, 2012, at 12:34 PM, Rob Weir wrote: > >> On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net> wrote: >>> >>> On Jan 15, 2012, at 1:49 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: >>> >>>> Rob Weir wrote: >>>>> Did you read anyone say that current privileges are going to be >>>>> dropped? I certainly did not say that. >>>> >>>> No, but that was a doubt I had: in the process of granting new privileges, >>>> it might be that someone notices that a lot of people already have high >>>> privileges, and that this group includes people currently unaffiliated >>>> with the project. I was just making sure that current privileges are not >>>> dropped now: this will still be an issue, but it can be dealt with >>>> separately. >>> >>> We need to have a common set of privileges for ALL committers. We should >>> not have to request it, it should be done. >>> >> >> That is a curious statement, considering that: > > For the BZ to be useful to the community it must be possible for any > contributor to have sufficient privileges to engage in the process. > > In the project's that I work on like Apache POI everyone has BZ rights to > create issues and change status. AFAIK it is very open and very helpful and > actually leads to valuable conversations with users. Even if some are similar > to a no its not a bug yes it is. No matter. > > You are allowed basic rights to open, comment, update and close JIRA issues > at Apache. Admin rights are special. > > BTW - an open BZ provides another path for contributors to get attention and > possibly become committers. > >> >> - committers are not automatically subscribed to ooo-private. > > So far, every committer is given the opportunity to do so. And it is > exceedingly easy. > >> - committers are not automatically list moderators. They need to request it. >> >> - committers are not automatically blog editors. They need to request it. >> >> - committers are not automatically wiki editors or admins. They need >> to request it. > > How much use has the project made of OOODEV cwiki vs. OOOUSERS cwiki? One is > by request and the other is open to anyone. > > IMO we should ask Infrastructure to drop OOODEV. > >> >> - committers are not automatically forum editors or admins. They need >> to request it. >> >> So far as I can tell, the only thing that happens automatically for >> committers is SVN access. And even that is not really automatic. > > I watch the Infrastructure ML. It is part of the workflow when the PPMC > requests the committer's id. An incubator committer is a more difficult setup > than a TLP committer, there is an extra step for Apache CMS permission. > >> >> Given the above, I had no expectations that Bugzilla access for >> committers would happen without request. Do you have a reason to be >> optimistic in this case? > > We have our own, separate BZ that is NOT part of the normal Apache BZ. > Perhaps it was missed back in July, but we are responsible. That's the cost > for keeping the old issue ids. > > >> >> And are you suggesting we wait for this to happen? > > Given that we are accountable for this BZ we as the PPMC are responsible for > its state. > >> Or would it make >> more sense to get a few volunteers, per my original note, and go >> forward with that for now? > > Yes, I agree that we need to get some volunteers. We should define what we > want our BZ admins to do. >
OK. That is clearer. When you previously said, "We should not have to request it, it should be done" I took that as it should be technologically done, and done automatically without request. I see now that you mean it should be done as a matter of our ordinary process and workflow, although it may require a manual step. +1 on that. > I would like to know the current mysterious closed policy and workflow in > this custom BZ. It really bothers me that we have no clue who has authority > and who doesn't. We are responsible. > > I would like to discuss what the policy should become. IMO - Open up normal, > non-admin permissions to all of the project's committers. Also, open normal > permissions up to the community as a whole. If someone abuses their > privileges then remove them. The BZ admin will need to deal with Spammers. > +1 But is there any way we can have our own BZ Admin distribution list? It is extremely weird that I get BZ Admin emails for all projects, including AOO, though I appear to have admin privileges for none of them > Regards, > Dave > >> >> -Rob >> >> >>> The PPMC should decide what the normal set of privileges should be for the >>> general community as well. >>> >>> Maybe as another thread this will noticed. >>> >>> I am really glad I rejected using BZ to discuss the website a few months >>> ago since no privileges with the AOO BZ have been assigned to anyone who >>> wasn't with the former project yet former members who have not continued >>> with this project still have privileges. >>> >>> This is a huge issue and ought to be addressed this week. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Dave >>> >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Andrea. >>> >
