[pkgdb] Call for beta-testers for group maintainership

[Rich Mattes]

On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Kevin Fenzi <kevin at scrye.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 07 Oct 2014 14:32:42 +0200
> Stanislav Ochotnicky <sochotnicky at redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tue 07 Oct 2014 01:50:46 PM CEST Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> > > On Mon, Oct 06, 2014 at 04:43:53PM -0400, Rich Mattes wrote:
> > >>    On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 12:04 PM, Pierre-Yves Chibon
> > >> <pingou at pingoured.fr> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>      Dear all,
> > >>
> > >>      A long desired and awaited feature for pkgdb2 is the
> > >> possibility to have FAS
> > >>      groups maintain packages.
> > >>
> > >>    Hooray!A  Thanks for this, I'm going to start testing it with
> > >> the robotics-sig FAS group and some of my packages.
> > >
> > > Awesome!
> > >
> > >>      I put together some instructions on the requirements and
> > >> steps: http://pkgdb2.readthedocs.org/en/latest/groups.html
> > >>
> > >>    I followed the above instructions to update the FAS group, but
> > >> I have a question about one of the requirements.A  The
> > >> instructions say that the mailing list for the group needs to have
> > >> a rhbz account.A  As far as I know bugzilla sends a confirmation
> > >> email during the account creation process.A  This seems kind of
> > >> iffy when the email address is for a public list: should I just
> > >> create the account and try to be the first list subscriber to
> > >> click the confirmation link?A  Or is there another way to create a
> > >> bugzilla account for SIG mailing lists?
> > >
> > > That's a good question. I guess I approached with the idea that the
> > > list would be new as well. So eventually, you would be the only one
> > > subscribed to it and thus the question is simple(r) to answer.
> > > But for the case of an existing list, I wonder if we can do better
> > > than what you describe.
> > > @Kevin any thoughts on this?
> >
> > This is normally done by sending an email to
> > bugzilla-requests at redhat.com and requesting creation of "pseudo" user
> > with email being the mailing list. Of course there would be no real
> > control over this pseudo user.
>
> I was thinking we would create a new list for each of these groups.
> These lists would be private (because they could contain private bugs
> assigned to the group). Then we could also filter on bugzilla password
> changes to catch those in moderation, or just let them through to the
> list since the list is private and only has on it trusted folks in the
> group.
>
> We could ask for pseudo users as well, but I've never done so, so not
> sure how long that takes, etc.
>
>
I don't anticipate any issues requiring private bugs given the scope of our
work, so making a new private mailing list doesn't seem too enticing.  It
might be easier to use the public mailing list, and just not assign
watchbugzilla and watchcommits to the pkgdb group.  I will bounce it off of
the robotics sig list, and if we do end up asking for a pseudo user on
bugzilla I'll report back with how long it took and any other issues.

Rich
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20141013/d2988d71/attachment.html>