On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 9:33 PM, Marco Fleckinger <marco.fleckin...@wikipedia.at> wrote: > > > On 02/14/2013 03:28 AM, Chad wrote: >> >> On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 9:22 PM, Marco Fleckinger >> <marco.fleckin...@wikipedia.at> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Having a "can review all extensions" group is easy, but allowing for >>>>> exemptions will be a pain to manage the ACLs for. For every extension >>>>> that opts out of being reviewed by this group, we'd have to adjust its >>>>> ACL to block the inherited permissions. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> How about instead of "can review all extensions", we make it easier to >>>> request review rights on non-WMF extensions? >>>> >>> Good idea, but in general there could just be 3+ different classes of >>> extensions? The class can be calculated by its importance, e.g. installed >>> on >>> WMF-sites, number of other wikis using it, etc. >>> >> >> Having classes of extensions is difficult to maintain from an ACL >> standpoint. Permissions in Gerrit are directly inherited (and there's no >> multiple inheritance), so things in mediawiki/extensions/* all have the >> same permissions. So having rules that apply to only some of those >> repositories requires editing ACLs for each repository in each "group." >> > Sorry, I think you misunderstood me. I meant classes like: > > * "Used by WMF" > * "non-WMF very important" > * "non-WMF important" > * "non-WMF less important" > * "non-WMF unimportant" > > No multiple inheritance will be needed for this model. >
Having these groups in Gerrit, or just in practice for application for permissions? Having groups like this in Gerrit would be a pain, that's what I'm saying. -Chad _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
