On 04/11/2016 04:54 AM, John Trowbridge wrote: > Hola OOOers, > > It came up in the meeting last week that we could benefit from a CI > subteam with its own meeting, since CI is taking up a lot of the main > meeting time. > > I like this idea, and think we should do something similar for the other > informal subteams (tripleoclient, UI), and also add a new subteam for > tripleo-quickstart (and maybe one for releases?). > > We should make seperate ACL's for these subteams as well. The informal > approach of adding cores who can +2 anything but are told to only +2 > what they know doesn't scale very well.
How so? Are we planning to give people +2 even though we don't trust them to not +2 things they shouldn't? I remain of the opinion that if we need ACL controls to keep someone from doing something then they shouldn't have +2 in the first place. Quickstart is a bit of a weird case because the regular contributors to it have not previously been very involved in TripleO upstream so I don't think most of us have enough context to know whether they should have +2. I guess the UI would fall under the same category, so I'd be in favor of keeping those two separate, but otherwise I think we're creating bureaucracy for its own sake. -Ben __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
