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 a
> "PC" == Pierre-Yves Chibon writes:
PC> So, does per-branch ACLs make sense to you? Have you had cases where
PC> you thought it was good/bad? More importantly, have you had cases
PC> where you would want to give someone access to just one branch and
PC> really really do *not* want them to ha
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 07:37:59PM +0100, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> 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)
Oh good — this was going t
I also wanted to add that a small bit of ACL flexibility is a very small
cost if we gain what Pagure offers. Easy personal package forks. Pull
requests for packages. I'd give up more than per-branch ACLs for that,
certainly.
- J<
___
devel mailing li
On Fri, 2017-03-24 at 15:37 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> Oh good — this was going to be my comment… having different main
> contacts and package admins might be.
Oh good — this was going to be my comment ☺
I do like and use the ability to have bug reports for different
branches go to different
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 02:34:42PM -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> > "PC" == Pierre-Yves Chibon writes:
>
> PC> So, does per-branch ACLs make sense to you? Have you had cases where
> PC> you thought it was good/bad? More importantly, have you had cases
> PC> where you would want to give
Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> 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?
Well, I don't want to get the EPEL bugs assigned to me.
> PS2: I am also considering thi
On 03/25/2017 01:45 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
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?
Well, I don't want to get the EPEL bugs assigne
On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 01:45:12AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> > 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?
>
> Well, I don't w
On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 01:45:12AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> > 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?
>
> Well, I don't w
> As I already mentioned in person when this came up in a DevConf talk, I
> think that this is a plan that will likely break a lot of things, especially
> the expectations all our users rely on (that everything in Everything has a
> consistent guaranteed life time), and that doing away with that
Dne 25.3.2017 v 07:14 Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a):
> On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 01:45:12AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
>>> 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 muc
On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 12:06:47PM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>
>
> Dne 25.3.2017 v 07:14 Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a):
> > On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 01:45:12AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> >> Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> >>> Of course, EPEL vs Fedora comes to mind here, but I wonder: if the EPEL
> >
El vie, 24-03-2017 a las 19:37 +0100, Pierre-Yves Chibon escribió:
> 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 co
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 12:37 PM, Pierre-Yves Chibon
wrote:
> 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.
I think it's fine to drop per-branch ACLs and
On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 01:45:12AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> As I already mentioned in person when this came up in a DevConf talk, I
> think that this is a plan that will likely break a lot of things, especially
> the expectations all our users rely on (that everything in Everything has a
> c
Matthew Miller wrote:
> Kevin, I genuinely don't understand your worry here. If Fedora had a
> long per-release lifetime already, and we were talking about shortening
> it, that'd be one thing, but I think the most common situation will
> actually be modules which have *longer* lifetime, and which
On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 12:09:47AM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > Kevin, I genuinely don't understand your worry here. If Fedora had a
> > long per-release lifetime already, and we were talking about shortening
> > it, that'd be one thing, but I think the most common situation will
> > actually be
18 matches
Mail list logo
