I want to become a Bugzilla commiter in the bzr repository. Thank you.
Summary: Could I get commit access to Bugzilla bzr repository? → Bzr Account request for Tiago Mello <firstname.lastname@example.org>
I can vouch for Tiago. (Bugzilla access requires only one voucher.)
(In reply to comment #1) > I can vouch for Tiago. (Bugzilla access requires only one voucher.) Not per the new policy. Two vouchers are required, as this would be under Level 2. https://wiki.mozilla.org/Commit_Access_Policy#Level_2_-_General_Access Need the Committer's Agreement (http://www.mozilla.org/hacking/committer/committers-agreement.pdf) filled out and sent to Erica (http://www.mozilla.org/hacking/notification/). Also need Tiago's SSH public key added to this bug as an attachment.
OS: Linux → All
Hardware: x86 → All
(In reply to comment #2) > Not per the new policy. Two vouchers are required, as this would be under Level > 2. https://wiki.mozilla.org/Commit_Access_Policy#Level_2_-_General_Access That section explicitly says: Requirements: one voucher - any Mozilla code module owner
Also, please see the "MODULES NOT ASSOCIATED WITH FIREFOX, THUNDERBIRD, OR SEAMONKEY" section of http://www.mozilla.org/hacking/committer/
(In reply to comment #3) > That section explicitly says: > > Requirements: one voucher - any Mozilla code module owner Er, yeah, sorry. This is a brand-new policy, so my apologies as I try to memorize it. (In reply to comment #4) > Also, please see the "MODULES NOT ASSOCIATED WITH FIREFOX, THUNDERBIRD, OR > SEAMONKEY" section of http://www.mozilla.org/hacking/committer/ That doesn't apply here. The new policy takes precedence.
(In reply to comment #5) > That doesn't apply here. The new policy takes precedence. Well, I'm glad that's been made oh-so-clear to whatever cabal is supposed to know about that, but it wasn't on the actual official policy page on mozilla.org.
However, in this case, you are not a module owner, so you can't vouch. http://www.mozilla.org/about/owners.html#bugzilla lists Dave as Bugzilla's only module owner.
(In reply to comment #6) > (In reply to comment #5) > > That doesn't apply here. The new policy takes precedence. > > Well, I'm glad that's been made oh-so-clear to whatever cabal is supposed to > know about that, but it wasn't on the actual official policy page on > mozilla.org. The policy literally just got finalized in the last week (and really only mentioned earlier today), so it's still a work-in-progress to get all the pages updated. I'll speak with Gerv about getting stuff updated as soon as possible.
That policy was never run by me or any other member of the Bugzilla Community, and we would have obviously complained, had it been.
Well, correction--it wasn't run by any of the leadership of the Bugzilla Community.
(In reply to comment #10) > Well, correction--it wasn't run by any of the leadership of the Bugzilla > Community. Discussion about the policy was held on mozilla.governance, and Mitchell even announced it was coming on mozilla.dev.planning. As a member of the Mozilla community and as someone who is a peer for a module, you should be subscribed to both of those newsgroups (especially dev-planning). Feel free to take up any issues you have with the new policy on mozilla.governance.
"But Mr Dent, the plans have been available in the local planning office for the last nine months."
We're sorry for the inconvenience. Can we offer you a complimentary towel to prepare for May?
Hahahaha. :-) Okay, okay. :-) I've subscribed to governance, I understand that there were policy changes, we'll see how it goes. For now, justdave has actually made myself and LpSolit also Owners for Bugzilla, so we should be qualified to vouch for timello, now.
(In reply to comment #14) > For now, justdave has actually made myself and LpSolit also Owners > for Bugzilla, so we should be qualified to vouch for timello, now. I'm not sure that's actually allowed... Based on my understanding of current procedure (mitchell, brendan, gerv -- please correct me if I'm wrong here), changes to module owners have to be approved by the Module Ownership System submodule of the Governance module (https://wiki.mozilla.org/Module_Owners_Activities_Modules#Governance_Submodule:_Module_Ownership_System). At least that's what I've been led to believe based on some changes to a module I'm currently an owner for...
Tiago: welcome to the Bugzilla developer community :-) Do please provide your SSH public key as per comment #2. Developing new policy means walking a tightrope between spamming 40 newsgroups with every new thing, and people not finding out when they should. I apologise that this time, it seems that we've fallen one side of the line. It's also true that while we are trying to make project-wide policy, sometimes things make a bit less sense for those parts of the project which are further from the centre, if you see what I mean. I will look at getting the relevant pages updated to link to the new policy - although we have having one last bit of discussion in .governance at the moment about production websites, and I might wait until that has resolved itself. Reed is right: changes to module ownership need to be approved by Mitchell and co. in the governance submodule. I'm sure they would have no problem making you and LpSolit co-owners if justdave requested it. Although perhaps, if you find that the structure were the two of you do the work, and justdave breaks any deadlocks to be one that works well, perhaps that's not what you want :-) Surely it would be easier for you simply to ask justdave to add a comment here confirming your nomination? It's not like adding new Bugzilla committers happens every day. Gerv
Created attachment 429104 [details] SSH public key Thank you Max and Gerv! I'm very proud to be part of the developers. Please, let me know if you need anything else.
Hey Gerv. Okay, thanks for being so helpful. :-) I'll participate in the discussions about the new policy on .governance, and I'll see if I can get justdave to comment here (even though he is on vacation).
Eh, vacation doesn't count for Bugzilla. ;) I'll confirm the voucher then.
Adding Erica to confirm the form.
(In reply to comment #15) > I'm not sure that's actually allowed... Based on my understanding of current > procedure (mitchell, brendan, gerv -- please correct me if I'm wrong here), > changes to module owners have to be approved by the Module Ownership System > submodule of the Governance module Nice to hear that some "privileges" are suddenly revoked, with no notification.
Erica: ping (see comment 20)
Still need to send the form. I'm doing some company paperwork in my side before sending it. Erica, as soon as I send the form I'll let you know by commenting here. Thank you!
Component: Account Request: Hg → Repository Account Requests
QA Contact: hg-acct-req → repo-acct-req
The form has been sent to Erica by email. Thanks.
I have received Tiago's Committer's Agreement.
voucher from module owner received (comment 19) and committer form received (comment 25) so over to IT to set up privs.
Assignee: marcia → server-ops
Account created and password sent by email.
Assignee: server-ops → ayounsi
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 8 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.