1:49 a.m.
#5418: Adopt policy that SCM request should be accepted from authorized users only
--------------------+------------------------
Reporter: ppisar | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: defect | Status: new
Milestone: | Component: git
Keywords: SCM | Blocked By:
Blocking: |
--------------------+------------------------
FESCo ticket [https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/981] moved to rel-eng
quee.
= Phenomenon
Release engineers proceed SCM request from non-authorized applicants.
= Background Analysis
spot added SCM change request for 4 packages he does not own nor co-
maintain and release engineer has processed the requests. The requests
were to create new branches owned by master owners.
Example [https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=835544#c7]:
{{{
From: Tom "spot" Callaway 2012-12-11 21:50:00 GMT
Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: perl-Pod-Markdown
New Branches: f16 f17
Owners: jplesnik mmaslano ppisar psabata
InitialCC: perl-sig
From: Jon Ciesla 2012-12-12 13:14:20 GMT
Git done (by process-git-requests).
}}}
This undermines regular maintainers' rights and obligations because they
cannot even be sure which branches their packages exist and which they are
responsible for. This conflicts with current policy for creating
additional branches on behalf third persons (the third person, owner of
new branch, asks current owner and current owner submits SCM request.)
= Implementation recommendation
Release engineers will accept SCM changes only from requesters who own or
co-maintaint the package.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5418>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
9:40 a.m.
#5418: Adopt policy that SCM request should be accepted from authorized users only
---------------------+-----------------------
Reporter: ppisar | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: defect | Status: new
Milestone: | Component: git
Resolution: | Keywords: SCM
Blocked By: | Blocking:
---------------------+-----------------------
Comment (by spot):
I would note the following points in my own defense here:
* The Fedora Perl Community is very open about permitting other people to
work on perl packages in Fedora.
* I added these requests because I needed these perl modules to be built
for active Fedora targets so that I could add a new, dependent, perl
module to upgrade another one of my perl modules.
* These perl package review requests were all done without branching for
_ANY_ active Fedora branches (just rawhide), which I feel is inappropriate
behavior for a package maintainer unless there is a technical reason
preventing the maintainer from releasing a new package on that active
Fedora branch. In fact, I thought that this lack of branching was the
mistake of a new packager rather than conscious abandonment, which is why
I requested branches with identical ownership, instead of simply taking
ownership for myself.
* There were no technical reasons preventing these perl modules from being
maintained in active Fedora branches. I did straight rebuilds with no
modifications.
* The owners were all CC'd on the bugzilla ticket and received
notification of the branching request and approvals.
* There is no policy stating that newly reviewed packages may not be
released into stable branches, or even any policy discouraging this, which
makes the original behavior of the packager to release these packages into
rawhide only very confusing.
I'd note for clarification that technically as a member of Rel-Eng, I
could have processed my own requests here, but I was not acting in that
capacity in these cases (3 total).
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5418#comment:1>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
12:22 p.m.
#5418: Adopt policy that SCM request should be accepted from authorized users only
---------------------+-----------------------
Reporter: ppisar | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: defect | Status: new
Milestone: | Component: git
Resolution: | Keywords: SCM
Blocked By: | Blocking:
---------------------+-----------------------
Comment (by kevin):
I'm not sure I understand the big deal here...
If spot had asked you to branch and maintain these packages for the other
releases, what would your answer have been?
if you did not want to maintain those packages for those releases, would
you have been ok with spot owning them?
...cannot even be sure which branches their packages exist and which
they are responsible for...
Wouldn't you know this from multiple places?
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5418#comment:2>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
2:28 a.m.
#5418: Adopt policy that SCM request should be accepted from authorized users only
---------------------+-----------------------
Reporter: ppisar | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: defect | Status: new
Milestone: | Component: git
Resolution: | Keywords: SCM
Blocked By: | Blocking:
---------------------+-----------------------
Comment (by ppisar):
The big deal is rel-eng processed request from person who is not in ACL
role for the package. This way anybody can change packages in package
database.
The What I would if spot had question is irrelevant.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5418#comment:3>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
10:50 a.m.
#5418: Adopt policy that SCM request should be accepted from authorized users only
---------------------+-----------------------
Reporter: ppisar | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: defect | Status: new
Milestone: | Component: git
Resolution: | Keywords: SCM
Blocked By: | Blocking:
---------------------+-----------------------
Comment (by kevin):
ok, FWIW, I would be fine with a check on scm requests that they come from
someone with the acls for the affected package.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5418#comment:4>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
5:09 p.m.
#5418: Adopt policy that SCM request should be accepted from authorized users only
---------------------+-----------------------
Reporter: ppisar | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: defect | Status: new
Milestone: | Component: git
Resolution: | Keywords: SCM
Blocked By: | Blocking:
---------------------+-----------------------
Comment (by toshio):
I am a little leary of this. there are definitely cases where it wouldbe
time consuming to require that all requests must come from an acl holder.
just as one example, when someone leaves red hat, it is common for their
manager or their manager via spot to let us know that package ownership
should change. with this rule we'd either need to wait out the non-
responsive maintainer time period or write a red hat specific exception.
in the specific case of adding branches, I wonder what we are protecting
against. we have been trying (sometimes with less success than others) to
get package maintainers to think less about owning a package and more
about being part of a team that builds fedora together. I think trying to
lock down who can make acl requests too much might be a step away from
this goal.
if we have very few solid problems with the current openness it might be
better to stick with an ask forgiveness instead of permission policy.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5418#comment:5>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
3:21 a.m.
#5418: Adopt policy that SCM request should be accepted from authorized users only
---------------------+-----------------------
Reporter: ppisar | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: defect | Status: new
Milestone: | Component: git
Resolution: | Keywords: SCM
Blocked By: | Blocking:
---------------------+-----------------------
Comment (by ppisar):
Perl SIG has each year problem with obviously dead packages which cannot
be blocked by SIG because only maintainer can do it. Half year
unresponsive maintainer process for Fedora releasing each half year is
unfeasible. Does it mean rules do not apply to spot?
I think the problem is unresponsive process does not work. Not ACLs.
In general I'm not against weakening ACL institute, but then
responsibility must come with power. In this case spot had to test, merge,
and build the packages in the new branches. Not only create branches and
hoping somebody else finishes the work.
However we have ACLs now, so we should use them now.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5418#comment:6>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
10:14 a.m.
#5418: Adopt policy that SCM request should be accepted from authorized users only
---------------------+-----------------------
Reporter: ppisar | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: defect | Status: new
Milestone: | Component: git
Resolution: | Keywords: SCM
Blocked By: | Blocking:
---------------------+-----------------------
Comment (by ausil):
I will add most of the people the process the git request queue are not
actually part of releng.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5418#comment:7>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
10:39 a.m.
#5418: Adopt policy that SCM request should be accepted from authorized users only
---------------------+-----------------------
Reporter: ppisar | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: defect | Status: new
Milestone: | Component: git
Resolution: | Keywords: SCM
Blocked By: | Blocking:
---------------------+-----------------------
Comment (by ppisar):
I'm curious who is responsible for git request queue. If neither releng
nor fesco, then who?
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5418#comment:8>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
10:46 a.m.
#5418: Adopt policy that SCM request should be accepted from authorized users only
---------------------+-----------------------
Reporter: ppisar | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: defect | Status: new
Milestone: | Component: git
Resolution: | Keywords: SCM
Blocked By: | Blocking:
---------------------+-----------------------
Comment (by limb):
Members of the cvsadmin group, there are currently 13 members, but it's
mostly myself and tibbs that process the queue these days, unless I'm
mistaken.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5418#comment:9>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
11:24 a.m.
#5418: Adopt policy that SCM request should be accepted from authorized users only
---------------------+-----------------------
Reporter: ppisar | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: defect | Status: new
Milestone: | Component: git
Resolution: | Keywords: SCM
Blocked By: | Blocking:
---------------------+-----------------------
Comment (by jstanley):
I don't think that this is a good thing. There are a few packages that I
maintain in EPEL, and someone else maintains them in Fedora proper.
Generally, I'll ask the maintainer if they would care if I maintain them
in EPEL, but that communication happens generally via private email, we
come an agreement, I make an SCM request, and voila. things get done.
Instituting a policy like this would require more bureaucracy on the part
of the maintainer in Fedora, who generally doesn't want to be involved in
EPEL.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5418#comment:10>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
11:32 a.m.
#5418: Adopt policy that SCM request should be accepted from authorized users only
---------------------+-----------------------
Reporter: ppisar | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: defect | Status: new
Milestone: | Component: git
Resolution: | Keywords: SCM
Blocked By: | Blocking:
---------------------+-----------------------
Comment (by rdieter):
imho, requiring a documented blessing from pkg maintainers is a "good
thing(tm)", just not sure if there's any good and practical way to
implement it and agree with jstanley's concerns about adding undue
bureaucracy burdens.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5418#comment:11>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
11:34 a.m.
#5418: Adopt policy that SCM request should be accepted from authorized users only
---------------------+-----------------------
Reporter: ppisar | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: defect | Status: new
Milestone: | Component: git
Resolution: | Keywords: SCM
Blocked By: | Blocking:
---------------------+-----------------------
Comment (by jwboyer):
Replying to [comment:11 rdieter]:
imho, requiring a documented blessing from pkg maintainers is a
"good
thing(tm)", just not sure if there's any good and practical way
to
implement it and agree with jstanley's concerns about adding undue
bureaucracy burdens.
The maintainer should get bugmail if someone submits a new SCM request in
the review bug, right? If so, just have people wait for an Ack comment to
the new SCM request.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5418#comment:12>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
4:55 a.m.
#5418: Adopt policy that SCM request should be accepted from authorized users only
---------------------+-----------------------
Reporter: ppisar | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: defect | Status: new
Milestone: | Component: git
Resolution: | Keywords: SCM
Blocked By: | Blocking:
---------------------+-----------------------
Comment (by ppisar):
Replying to [comment:10 jstanley]:
There are a few packages that I maintain in EPEL, and someone else
maintains them in Fedora proper. Generally, I'll ask the maintainer if
they would care if I maintain them in EPEL, but that communication happens
generally via private email, we come an agreement, I make an SCM request,
and voila. things get done.
That's different case. In your scenario I do not demand master branch
owner permission because the requested branch will not affect master
owner.
To be more explicit: There is problem somebody can make you owner of a
branch without your approval. E.g. you would like an EPEL branch, so you
would requested new EPEL branch to be owned by master branch owner.
Without his/her approval.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5418#comment:13>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
3:10 p.m.
#5418: Adopt policy that SCM request should be accepted from authorized users only
---------------------+-----------------------
Reporter: ppisar | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: defect | Status: new
Milestone: | Component: git
Resolution: | Keywords: SCM
Blocked By: | Blocking:
---------------------+-----------------------
Comment (by till):
Replying to [comment:13 ppisar]:
To be more explicit: There is problem somebody can make you owner of
a
branch without your approval. E.g. you would like an EPEL branch, so you
would requested new EPEL branch to be owned by master branch owner.
Without his/her approval.
If someone made you owner of a branch without your consent, you can just
orphan it.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5418#comment:14>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
6:15 p.m.
#5418: Adopt policy that SCM request should be accepted from authorized users only
---------------------+-------------------------
Reporter: ppisar | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: defect | Status: new
Milestone: | Component: git
Resolution: | Keywords: SCM Meeting
Blocked By: | Blocking:
---------------------+-------------------------
Changes (by till):
* keywords: SCM => SCM Meeting
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5418#comment:15>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
11:15 a.m.
#5418: Adopt policy that SCM request should be accepted from authorized users only
----------------------+-------------------------
Reporter: ppisar | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: defect | Status: closed
Milestone: | Component: git
Resolution: wontfix | Keywords: SCM Meeting
Blocked By: | Blocking:
----------------------+-------------------------
Changes (by till):
* status: new => closed
* resolution: => wontfix
Comment:
It was discussed during the current meeting. This task is not within
relengs domain and the situation is not considered to require changes.
Meeting logs will be in
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/teams/releng/
probably at
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/teams/releng/releng.2014-01-06-16.29.html
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5418#comment:16>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
3:39 a.m.
#5418: Adopt policy that SCM request should be accepted from authorized users only
----------------------+-------------------------
Reporter: ppisar | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: defect | Status: closed
Milestone: | Component: git
Resolution: wontfix | Keywords: SCM Meeting
Blocked By: | Blocking:
----------------------+-------------------------
Comment (by ppisar):
If I read the log correctly, only following lines deal this issue:
{{{
16:40:06 <tilldroid> 5418
16:40:32 <tilldroid> Imho it should be closed wontfix
16:40:45 <dgilmore> tilldroid: thats really not a releng thing as we dont
process the scm queue
16:41:10 <dgilmore> the processing of the queue is kind off a strange area
though
16:41:21 <tilldroid> So it can be forwarded to fesco?
16:41:22 <dgilmore> ~there is a few people that have been doing it forever
16:41:46 <dgilmore> i honestly think we should just close it cantfix
16:41:58 <dgilmore> and there is nothing to do
16:42:33 <dgilmore> not sure why that ticket did not show up in the
meeting report
}}}
I thought that rel-engs process SCM requests. I'm going to forward it to
FESCo because somebody has to be responsible.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5418#comment:17>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
4 a.m.
#5418: Adopt policy that SCM request should be accepted from authorized users only
----------------------+-------------------------
Reporter: ppisar | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: defect | Status: closed
Milestone: | Component: git
Resolution: wontfix | Keywords: SCM Meeting
Blocked By: | Blocking:
----------------------+-------------------------
Comment (by ppisar):
Actually this request was reported here based on FESCo decision. I will
try Fedora Infrastructure which seems to be more appropriate. Moving to
[https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/4166].
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5418#comment:18>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
3761
days inactive
4150
days old
rel-eng@lists.fedoraproject.org
18 comments
1 participants
participants (1)
-
Fedora Release Engineering