Future owners/ACL choices

[Toshio Kuratomi]

On 2/24/07, Tom Lane <tgl at redhat.com> wrote:
> Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger at gmail.com> writes:
> > notting and I are in agreement that Commit, packagedb ACLs, and
> > notifications will be requested by user and approved by package owner
> > (I'm thinking of auto-approving watchbugzilla and watchcommits but I
> > hadn't mentioned that before.)  We disagree about ownership.  I think we
> > should allow members of cvsextras to take and release ownership at will.
>
> I must be misunderstanding your proposal.  You want actions X, Y, and Z
> to be approved by the package owner ... but anyone can become the
> package owner at will?  This does not compute.  You might as well just
> say that every member of cvsextras has all the keys to the kingdom.
>
> Reading between the lines I think you might have meant that anyone could
> take ownership of a currently-unowned package; but that's not what you
> actually said.
>
You are correct:

Releasing packages:
Owned package: owner may release at will

Taking Packages:
Orphaned package: Anyone with cvsextras may take
Owned package: Not usually allowed.  Requests for this would be queued
and approved by an admin.

Sorry about that; Jason's reply should also have clued me in that I
was being less than clear.

-Toshio