Dne 23. 11. 22 v 21:05 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 05:44:01PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> The mitigation/successor strategy is to have comaintainers for every
> package.
>
> Unfortunately our tools enforce the notion of a "main admin" and
> if that person leaves that role has to be given to another
> comaintainer explicitly.
I don't disagree about the "main admin" think, but I think we've already
been there. I remember that the unresponsive policy worked in a way that
when the main contact was not responsive, the package was given to
second co-maintainer in alphabetical order. And I can tell you this was
frustrating having my user name starting with 'v'. And frustrating
driving the unresponsive maintainer process just having the package
given to another inactive maintainer.
Vít
Thats due to bugzilla really. bugzilla only supports assigning a bug
to
1 account. ;(
> IMHO we would be better off eliminating the notion of 'main admin'
> entirely and have all co-maintainers be at the equal level, so there
> is no need for a dance to give packages to comaintainers. There
> should only be manual action needed if the last comaintainer quits.
+100
> A workaround for the 'main admin' problem is to have a robot account
> as the 'main admin' and all the real people as merely 'admin', so
> the main admin never leaves, but that's a bit tedious to setup.
I agree, but it would be a good deal of work to switch to.
I'd definitely like to do this when/if we move away from bugzilla.
kevin
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue