Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 273759 - ciaran mcreesh: editbugs perms for PMS
Summary: ciaran mcreesh: editbugs perms for PMS
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Infrastructure
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Other (show other bugs)
Hardware: All Linux
: High normal (vote)
Assignee: Gentoo Infrastructure
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2009-06-11 18:46 UTC by Ciaran McCreesh
Modified: 2009-11-14 20:29 UTC (History)
10 users (show)

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Ciaran McCreesh 2009-06-11 18:46:55 UTC
I'm supposed to be able to, and used to be able to (see for example http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_activity.cgi?id=217492) close and reopen bugs with the "PMS/EAPI" component under "Gentoo Hosted Projects". For some reason my ability to do this vanished a while ago, and I never chased it up, but now I've got a big list of EAPI 3 things that needs tidying up. Could someone please find out what happened here and rectify the situation?
Comment 1 solar (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2009-06-11 19:26:52 UTC
Please show where devrel, userrel and the council all voted on that you should be given any special perms within Gentoo anywhere. The point of getting the boot is to limit what access you have. Not to make you a 50% dev.
Comment 2 Ciaran McCreesh 2009-06-11 19:33:38 UTC
As you can see from the example I gave, I used to have these privileges -- that was already decided when we moved PMS to Gentoo hardware, and isn't what's for discussion here. The question is why they went away.
Comment 3 solar (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2009-06-11 20:04:43 UTC
This bug can sit here and rot till you can show us where a decision was made to give you any sort of perms back.
Comment 4 Ciaran McCreesh 2009-06-11 20:19:49 UTC
You've already seen that I had those permissions. The question is why they disappeared, not why I was given them.
Comment 5 Petteri Räty (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2009-06-11 21:26:57 UTC
This link shows that ciaran did have editbugs a year ago:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_activity.cgi?id=217492
Comment 6 Robin Johnson archtester Gentoo Infrastructure gentoo-dev Security 2009-06-12 00:51:27 UTC
FYI, my research shows halcy0n removed ciaranm's perms on 2008-06-20 18:14:45, it was NOT noted anywhere in bugzilla. He just never noticed it before now because he was the filer of the other bugs and thus had auto perms to them.
Comment 7 solar (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2009-06-12 03:49:03 UTC
robbat2, thank you for doing the research.

Mark/halcy0n,
We understand you are the QA lead and PMS falls under that, but do you recall why you removed his permissions last year? 
Comment 8 Mark Loeser (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2009-06-12 15:13:02 UTC
Because I was told that I needed to ensure such permissions were being used correctly, and I did not want to be involved with PMS any longer.  No one was at that point that was a Gentoo developer.  I don't care if he has permission, so long as there is no need for me to be involved.
Comment 9 solar (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2009-06-13 03:50:46 UTC
Ciaran,
In order for you to regain PMS bugzilla privileges semi-properly within Gentoo you will need to seek a responsible party/a single sponsor for you're actions as with Halyc0n before. KingTaco is willing to explain those responsibilities to anybody you might find.
Comment 10 Ciaran McCreesh 2009-06-13 14:59:50 UTC
The Council voted to just restore them, and then went ahead and did that. By whose authority was that overridden?
Comment 11 Mike Doty (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2009-06-13 15:57:52 UTC
Ciaran,

You need to have a current gentoo developer in good standing take responsibility for your actions on bugs, just as Halcy0n did.  The council vote is moot as there is no disagreement.  Once said developer has talked to robbat2 or myself, the flag will be re-added.
Comment 12 Ciaran McCreesh 2009-06-13 16:01:55 UTC
So Infra's decision overrules the Council's vote at the last meeting, and Infra used its authority to revert the permissions change made by the Council?
Comment 13 Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto Gentoo Infrastructure gentoo-dev 2009-06-13 16:34:46 UTC
(In reply to comment #12)
> So Infra's decision overrules the Council's vote at the last meeting, and Infra
> used its authority to revert the permissions change made by the Council?

Please stop with the attacks.
You started by accusing infra of abuse and of being behind some conspiracy to prevent you from working on PMS, thus you had been removed access to bugzilla. Now you're trying to stir more confusion by stating they're not following "procedure" and trying to cause a rift between infra and council.

Let me read the proposal by the council:

22:59 <@Betelgeuse> Ok let's vote on turning on editbugs back on. This means ciaranmn can edit bugs in all products.
22:59 <@Betelgeuse> It will be revoked if misused like usual.

Following bugzilla procedures, this means having a Gentoo dev assuming the responsibility for your actions on bugzilla - which is exactly what infra is asking for here. All you and or the council needs to do is find someone to watch your bugzilla alias. This also explains Mark's action as PMS is / was(?) under QA wing. He should have let others know, though.

It seems bug 236218 is being used to document granting editbugs privs and who is taking responsibility for it. So anyone wishing to take responsability just leave a note there.

@infra: At this point do you agree anyone with the ability to grant editbugs privs can just leave a note there and grant the privs back as usual?
Comment 14 Ciaran McCreesh 2009-06-13 16:44:30 UTC
(In reply to comment #13)
> Please stop with the attacks.
> You started by accusing infra of abuse and of being behind some conspiracy to
> prevent you from working on PMS, thus you had been removed access to bugzilla.

I haven't accused infra of abuse at all. I would merely like to understand why Infra overruled the Council and reverted an action the Council had taken.

> 22:59 <@Betelgeuse> Ok let's vote on turning on editbugs back on. This means
> ciaranmn can edit bugs in all products.
> 22:59 <@Betelgeuse> It will be revoked if misused like usual.
> 
> Following bugzilla procedures, this means having a Gentoo dev assuming the
> responsibility for your actions on bugzilla - which is exactly what infra is
> asking for here.

That wasn't what the Council decided. The Council simply turned editbugs on. Infra turned it off later.

Also, please point to the documentation of that bugzilla procedure. I wasn't aware of it, and from their actions, apparently the Council weren't either.

> All you and or the council needs to do is find someone to
> watch your bugzilla alias. This also explains Mark's action as PMS is / was(?)
> under QA wing. He should have let others know, though.

All I want is to find out whether, as promised when I moved PMS to Gentoo hardware, I can work on PMS without having to get involved in Gentoo politics and some insane power struggle between solar and the Council. If that's not possible, that's fine -- I'm more than happy to move PMS elsewhere.
Comment 15 Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto Gentoo Infrastructure gentoo-dev 2009-06-13 16:53:16 UTC
(In reply to comment #14)
> (In reply to comment #13)
> > Please stop with the attacks.
> > You started by accusing infra of abuse and of being behind some conspiracy to
> > prevent you from working on PMS, thus you had been removed access to bugzilla.
...
> I haven't accused infra of abuse at all. I would merely like to understand why
> Infra overruled the Council and reverted an action the Council had taken.
> All I want is to find out whether, as promised when I moved PMS to Gentoo
> hardware, I can work on PMS without having to get involved in Gentoo politics
> and some insane power struggle between solar and the Council. If that's not
> possible, that's fine -- I'm more than happy to move PMS elsewhere.

So you haven't accused infra, just solar. Please stop with that.
About the policy for having a Gentoo dev watching users with editbugs privs, I'll ask infra, but as you can see by the bug I listed, infra and devrel are tracking suc privs and I and others have been doing it for a while.
Comment 16 Petteri Räty (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2009-06-13 16:59:38 UTC
(In reply to comment #14)
> 
> That wasn't what the Council decided. The Council simply turned editbugs on.
> Infra turned it off later.
> 

It was never turned on as I clicked the wrong button and at the point I noticed that it was decided to wait. You acknowledged this yourself:

<11.06.2009 21:21> <@Betelgeuse> heh clicked the wrong place
<11.06.2009 21:21> <@lu_zero> uff
<11.06.2009 21:21> <@Betelgeuse> stupid me
<11.06.2009 21:22> <+ciaranm> ah, ok, thanks
<snip/>
<11.06.2009 21:23> <@Betelgeuse> ciaranm: ok let's wait a couple of days then

(In reply to comment #11)
> 
> You need to have a current gentoo developer in good standing take
> responsibility for your actions on bugs, just as Halcy0n did.
>

Would probably best be someone listed for the PMS project:
gentoofan23, fauli, ulm: Volunteers?

Comment 17 Ciaran McCreesh 2009-06-13 17:30:15 UTC
(In reply to comment #15)
> So you haven't accused infra, just solar. Please stop with that.

According to the guarantees I got when I moved PMS to Gentoo infrastructure, solar isn't supposed to be able to modify access in any way to anything PMS related. That was one of the conditions of the move...
Comment 18 Mike Doty (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2009-06-13 17:40:19 UTC
(In reply to comment #17)
> (In reply to comment #15)
> > So you haven't accused infra, just solar. Please stop with that.
> 
> According to the guarantees I got when I moved PMS to Gentoo infrastructure,
> solar isn't supposed to be able to modify access in any way to anything PMS
> related. That was one of the conditions of the move...
> 

Solar has not touched your bugzilla account in any way.  Stop the accusations.  You where told what needed to happen to re-add the flag to your account and any other discussion is not appropriate on this bug. 
Comment 19 Ciaran McCreesh 2009-06-13 17:44:38 UTC
No, the Council decided one thing, and then Infra decided to change it in an arbitrary way just to make people jump through hoops as a power play. If Infra wants to mess around like that, that's fine -- I'm quite happy to move elsewhere. PMS needs to be hosted somewhere where we don't have to worry about this kind of messing around, and if that can't be Gentoo then please just say so so I can find it a new home.
Comment 20 Petteri Räty (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2009-06-13 17:57:55 UTC
(In reply to comment #19)
> No, the Council decided one thing, and then Infra decided to change it in an
> arbitrary way just to make people jump through hoops as a power play. 

As far as I know infra is just following their existing procedures and in the end we didn't we use the council powers to do otherwise. I don't think this is helpful in any way for PMS in Gentoo. If that is even a goal is of course an another matter.
Comment 21 Ciaran McCreesh 2009-06-13 18:03:28 UTC
(In reply to comment #20)
> (In reply to comment #19)
> As far as I know infra is just following their existing procedures

Where are these procedures documented? Where are the examples of these procedures being followed previously?

> and in the end we didn't we use the council powers to do otherwise.

Only by accident, not by intention.

> I don't think this is helpful in any way for PMS in Gentoo. If that is even a
> goal is of course an another matter.

What I want is to be able to get some work done without having to be involved in the typical Gentoo nonsense. If that isn't possible, please just say so.
Comment 22 solar (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2009-06-13 18:09:14 UTC
Apparently there is no permanent cure for disillusional paranoia but it can be treated with psychoanalytic or insulin.
Comment 23 Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2009-06-13 18:20:40 UTC
(In reply to comment #21)
> (In reply to comment #20)
> > (In reply to comment #19)
> > As far as I know infra is just following their existing procedures
> 
> Where are these procedures documented? Where are the examples of these
> procedures being followed previously?

In bug #236218.
Comment 24 Petteri Räty (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2009-06-13 18:27:00 UTC
(In reply to comment #21)
> 
> Where are these procedures documented? Where are the examples of these
> procedures being followed previously?
> 

I know at least the teams I lead have lots of internal procedures that aren't externally documented. 

> > and in the end we didn't we use the council powers to do otherwise.
> 
> Only by accident, not by intention.
> 

Yes but council via recruiters not doing it means infra will handle it their way.

> 
> What I want is to be able to get some work done without having to be involved
> in the typical Gentoo nonsense. If that isn't possible, please just say so.
>

Not having to deal with Gentoo nonsense, the easiest way is not to deal with Gentoo at all.
Comment 25 Ciaran McCreesh 2009-06-13 18:34:10 UTC
(In reply to comment #24)
> > What I want is to be able to get some work done without having to be involved
> > in the typical Gentoo nonsense. If that isn't possible, please just say so.
> >
> 
> Not having to deal with Gentoo nonsense, the easiest way is not to deal with
> Gentoo at all.

Alright. Does anyone who contributes to PMS have any objections to using Github for hosting?
Comment 26 Ben de Groot (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2009-06-13 21:40:39 UTC
(In reply to comment #25)
> (In reply to comment #24)
> > Not having to deal with Gentoo nonsense, the easiest way is not to deal with
> > Gentoo at all.
> 
> Alright. Does anyone who contributes to PMS have any objections to using
> Github for hosting?

No, you misunderstand. Not dealing with Gentoo at all means not dealing with PMS either. You would also be doing your fellow Exherbo devs a favour, as they want you to stop wasting your time on Gentoo.

Comment 27 Ciaran McCreesh 2009-06-13 21:47:05 UTC
Unfortunately, I strongly suspect that if PMS is left to others, it will either rot or rapidly be made unusable... Also, please stop the Exherbo trolling, it has nothing to do with any of this.
Comment 28 Ulrich Müller gentoo-dev 2009-06-13 22:00:38 UTC
(In reply to comment #25)
> Does anyone who contributes to PMS have any objections to using Github for
> hosting?

I have objections, as I have already stated during Thursday's council meeting. PMS should stay on Gentoo infrastructure.

But it is sort of pointless if on the one hand we give Ciaran commit access to the PMS git repo, and on the other hand refuse him the ability to handle PMS bugs. Honestly, where do you see the potential for abuse here? (And there are 17 people on the pms-bugs alias, including 4 council members.)

So, can we *please* get this issue off the table in some unbureaucratic manner?
Comment 29 Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto Gentoo Infrastructure gentoo-dev 2009-06-13 22:49:21 UTC
(In reply to comment #16)
> Would probably best be someone listed for the PMS project:
> gentoofan23, fauli, ulm: Volunteers?

(In reply to comment #28)
> But it is sort of pointless if on the one hand we give Ciaran commit access to
> the PMS git repo, and on the other hand refuse him the ability to handle PMS
> bugs. Honestly, where do you see the potential for abuse here? (And there are
> 17 people on the pms-bugs alias, including 4 council members.)
> 
> So, can we *please* get this issue off the table in some unbureaucratic manner?

Ulrich, there's a very quick and simple way to deal with this as stated before. Do you accept the responsibility of watching ciaranm actions in Bugzilla? Petteri asked you and a few others about that in comment 16.
Comment 30 Robin Johnson archtester Gentoo Infrastructure gentoo-dev Security 2009-06-15 22:12:38 UTC
ulm has taken up the mantle of a watch on ciaran. Accordingly, I've granted the editbugs perms back to ciaran.
Comment 31 Ulrich Müller gentoo-dev 2009-10-13 19:51:43 UTC
(In reply to comment #30)
> ulm has taken up the mantle of a watch on ciaran.

I am not willing to do this any more.

Let's say, I'm taking this for another month, as transition period. So you have time to find somebody else.
Comment 32 Joshua Jackson (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2009-10-13 20:33:57 UTC
If no one is willing to oversee him, I would recommend removal of editbugs privileges.

It shouldn't be too hard for for ciaran to find a kind soul to take responsibility for his actions.

Comment 33 Ulrich Müller gentoo-dev 2009-10-13 20:40:12 UTC
(In reply to comment #32)
> If no one is willing to oversee him, I would recommend removal of editbugs
> privileges.

No rush please. As I said, I'll still oversee him until 2009-11-13. And I haven't noticed any misconduct so far.

> It shouldn't be too hard for for ciaran to find a kind soul to take
> responsibility for his actions.

Comment 34 Tiziano Müller (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2009-10-21 18:52:15 UTC
I will do it if everyone agrees.
Comment 35 Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto Gentoo Infrastructure gentoo-dev 2009-10-29 16:08:52 UTC
(In reply to comment #34)
> I will do it if everyone agrees.

As far as the "watching bugzilla actions policy" goes, I don't see why anyone would (should) object.

@council:
Would you prefer (require?) that a PMS member watch over?
Comment 36 Tiziano Müller (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2009-10-29 22:49:21 UTC
(In reply to comment #35)
> (In reply to comment #34)
> > I will do it if everyone agrees.
> 
> As far as the "watching bugzilla actions policy" goes, I don't see why anyone
> would (should) object.
> 
> @council:
> Would you prefer (require?) that a PMS member watch over?
> 
Which I should join anyway considering my past involvement in PMS related topics. If needed I'll do it rather sooner than later.
Comment 37 Ulrich Müller gentoo-dev 2009-11-14 18:58:28 UTC
(In reply to comment #33)
> As I said, I'll still oversee him until 2009-11-13.

Removed from my watch list, as announced one month ago.
Comment 38 Tiziano Müller (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2009-11-14 19:24:02 UTC
... and added to my watchlist.