----- Original Message ----- > From: "Tristan Cacqueray" <[email protected]> > To: "Matthieu Huin" <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2016 5:38:21 PM > Subject: Re: [Softwarefactory-dev] Use config-repo to manage projects too > > On 02/23/2016 04:28 PM, Matthieu Huin wrote: > > Pros: > > - quick solution to a problem we've had for a while > > I disagree, that is far from being quick and it's quite a disruptive > change imo. Managing project through a config-repo needs a file > structure to cleverly describe projects, e.g.: > > "sf": > ptl: {name: ..., irc: ..., email: ...} > irc-channell: ... > description: ... > url: ... (for pages controller) > tags: lxc-based-ci, nested-rdo-ci > deliverables: > 'image': {repos: ['software-factory', ], ci: 'functional-tests'} > 'client': {repos: ['python-sfmanager', ] ci: 'unit-test'} > 'server': {repos: ['managesf', ]} > > That story would be 3.x materials since it's a breaking change. >
I should have said "quicker than adding roles management". :) > > Cons: > > - will collide with roles management that we are bound to have at some > > point (but not in a near future sadly) > Why not define roles along the project description ? (as proposed above, > the ptl and core groups could be listed there) > > > - you need to give commit rights on the config repos for it to be fully > > usable. > Everyone should be able to propose config-repo change, only admin should > be able to approve... Isn't that the case already ? > > So how is this different from having the admin creating the project if the change can only be validated by him ? That was the point I was trying to make here. _______________________________________________ Softwarefactory-dev mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/softwarefactory-dev
