VOTE: CVS Admin with Flags (Version 3)

[Toshio Kuratomi]

On Mon, 2007-02-12 at 17:09 -0500, Warren Togami wrote:
> FESCO Members, I would like this process to be ratified in order to get
> rid of CVSSyncNeeded.  If you think the process below should be adjusted
> before ratification, please reply with comments.  This has NOTHING to do
> with the review process which must be fixed independently.
> 
> Changes since Version 2:
> - notting pointed out, how do people request branches for a package 
> already imported?  Just comment in the bug and set fedora-cvs? again. 
> This works fine even on CLOSED bugs.
> - Multiple owners are possible.  Please comma separate the owners in a list.
> - Other ways to use fedora-cvs are spelled out explicitly.
> 
> Thanks,
> Warren Togami
> wtogami at redhat.com
> 
> Current Crappy CVSSyncNeeded Wiki Procedure
> ===========================================
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/CVSSyncNeeded
> 1. Request new package and branch.
> 2. Wait until somebody creates empty directories and edits owners.list.
> 3. Owner checks stuff in and builds.
> 
> Using the Wiki for this process has always sucked.  We could embed this
> process within the Bugzilla review tickets themselves.
> 
> ==================================
> = Proposal: CVS Admin with Flags =
> ==================================
> New Packages
> ============
> 1) Review is complete, fedora-review+
> 2) Owner writes in the Bugzilla comment something like:
> <Branches> <PackageName> <BugzillaNames>
> Please comma separate the co-maintainers if you have more than one.
> Examples:
> FC-5 FC-6 foopackage bobjoe at gmail.com
> FC-6 barpackage bobjoe at gmail.com,mary at example.com
> 
> 3) Set fedora-cvs flag to ?
> 4) CVS Admins get e-mail about fedora-cvs flag.  All context of the
> review is within the bug itself, so they can easily read all details
> about the package and verify approval validity.  The Admin then creates
> CVS directories and sets owner in owners.list.  Clear the fedora-cvs
> flag to BLANK.
> 5) Owner checks in and builds.
> 
> More Branches on Existing Packages
> ==================================
> 1) Use existing review ticket, even if it is CLOSED, this is fine.
> 2) Write in a comment the additional branch names you desire.
> 3) Set fedora-cvs?
> 
> Change Owner or Add Co-Maintainers
> ==================================
> 1) Use existing review ticket, even if it is CLOSED, this is fine.
> 2) Write in a comment the change request and justification if appropriate.
> 3) Set fedora-cvs?
> 
> (If bulk changes are required (i.e. more than six at once), please talk 
> directly to a Fedora CVS administrator.)
> 
> Special CVS Admin Requests
> ==========================
> In some cases you will want special CVS requests, like fixing import 
> accidents or removing packages that were added in error.
> 1) Use existing review ticket, even if it is CLOSED, this is fine.
> 2) Write in a comment your request and why it should be done.
> 3) Set fedora-cvs?
> 
> Benefits
> ========
> - This fedora-cvs flag eliminates the need for CVSSyncNeeded
> entirely.  An actual work queue with tickets!
> - fedora-cvs can be a simple canned query for CVS admins to see.
> Awesome possibilities offered via RSS too... =)
> 
> Notes
> =====
> - Unlike other flags, fedora-cvs is only BLANK or ?.  fedorabugs members
> may request fedora-cvs by setting it to ?.  This sends an e-mail to CVS
> Admins, signifying that attention is required.
> - Syncing from owners.list to CVS ACL's happen every 30 minutes.

I think we're going to run into potential confusion with the use of
flags here and for determining status during the review.  However, I
think that using a flag here is better than using CVSSyncNeeded.  So I'm
+1 here but am noting that it makes me slightly more biased against
using flags for reviews.

-Toshio
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/attachments/20070212/e590397d/attachment.sig>