On 09/10/2012 03:46 PM, Simon Wilkinson wrote:
On 10 Sep 2012, at 20:37, Dave Botsch wrote:

Can you clarify "a bug" below? Does this qualify as "any bug" or "any
bug not in the security queue"?
Sorry, all of this applies only to bugs in the openafs-bugs queue. I'm not 
(currently) proposing changing access to bugs in the openafs-security queue. 
I'm not say that openafs-security is perfect as is, just that it's a discussion 
for another time.


On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 08:33:54PM +0100, Simon Wilkinson wrote:
On 10 Sep 2012, at 16:30, Andrew Deason wrote:

Aside from the spam/abuse angle, which people have covered ("it's a
problem, but tractable")... many extant RT accounts are pretty
restricted. IIRC, I can't 'steal' ownership of anything, or comment on
any ticket I'm not explicitly included on, which makes it pretty darn
difficult to use.

I think that means I can't 'resolve' things owned by other people unless
I get them to explicitly reassign ownership. I also cannot 'delete' spam
tickets and such.

Opening _that_ much up I believe is simpler.
Okaty, so as a first step, let's fix this. I believe that this is just a case 
of changing the permission set, and possibly the list of users with a given 
permissions.

I believe a while back, the offer was made to do this, providing that we had 
some agreement on what those permission sets should be.

So, I'm proposing the following sets:

guest:
        As present, can view the openafs-bugs queue, but can't update them

commenter:
        Can do anything to a bug, but can't delete it, or merge it with another 
bug, (these are potentially irreversible steps in RT)

developer:
        Can do anything to a bug

And then the existing set of permissions for the security queue. All active 
accounts would be by default in the 'commentor' state. Anyone who meets my 
earlier criteria for +2 access to gerrit would also be in the developer set.

And then we solve the issue of how to do automatic signup as a separate step.

Any comments?

Cheers,

Simon.


I'm fine with this. I think that the openafs-doc queue should have the same permissions as the openafs-bugs queue.

Jason
_______________________________________________
OpenAFS-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel

Reply via email to