767629 - Need permission to edit bugs

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(bugzilla.mozilla.org :: Administration, task)

Description

[Norbert Lindenberg]

User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:13.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/13.0.1
Build ID: 20120614114901

Steps to reproduce:

Created a bugzilla account: [e-mail]
Started as a contractor at Mozilla.
Tried to assign bug 724531 to myself.


Actual results:

Nothing; I don't see a way to assign a bug to myself. I probably don't have the right permissions for that. According to the help files, I need "editbugs" permission; I have "everyone".


Expected results:

I'd like to see a user interface element when looking at bug 724531 that lets me assign the bug to myself.

Comment 1

[David Lawrence [:dkl]]

Gerv, is the process outlined at http://www.gerv.net/hacking/before-you-mail-gerv.html still relevant today? Should we streamline this somehow so that BMO admins can take over some of the vetting process from you or is the load still small enough for you to continue to manage?

Thanks
dkl

Comment 2

[:Gavin Sharp [email: [e-mail]]]

David: The bar for editbugs is pretty low. Gerv's process is the best advertised, but it's certainly not the only way to get the bit (there are many people who grant the privilege when asked), and so if in your judgement as a b.m.o admin someone needs it set, you should feel free to just grant it.

I've granted Norbert canconfirm/editbugs, since I trust that he won't abuse the privileges :)

Comment 3

[David Lawrence [:dkl]]

(In reply to :Gavin Sharp (use [e-mail] for email) from comment #2)
> David: The bar for editbugs is pretty low. Gerv's process is the best
> advertised, but it's certainly not the only way to get the bit (there are
> many people who grant the privilege when asked), and so if in your judgement
> as a b.m.o admin someone needs it set, you should feel free to just grant it.
> 
> I've granted Norbert canconfirm/editbugs, since I trust that he won't abuse
> the privileges :)

I agree with the bar being low and I was not implying that Norman or anyone else who applies should not get the permissions they need. Just was curious what the current process is these days and whether the BMO admins can offload some of the work involved from Gerv and yourself. 

If we do that, then I want to make sure we document exactly what circumstances a person should get (or not get) the editbugs rights somewhere easily accessible such as the w.m.o/BMO wiki page.

I know that @mozilla.(com|org) addresses get it automatically but it is not always apparent for us for the others that apply for it.

dkl

Comment 4

[Gervase Markham [:gerv]]

dkl: the process is not onerous; as Gavin says, there are multiple routes, and I'm happy to keep maintaining mine. It's basically a "clue barrier" - it's a way of ensuring that people who apply have non-zero clue. 

Other people have the ability to grant editbugs, and do based on requests on IRC. I would encourage them to apply a similar clue barrier, but we've never got as far as, or felt the need to, standardize methods across the project.

IMO, incidentally, it's wrong that mozilla.org/.com addresses get it (or any other project privilege) automatically. It's great that Norbert has come to work for MoCo, and I'm sure he'd pass any reasonable barrier after a couple of days of work, but "I am a contractor for/employee of MoCo, therefore I should be able to edit bugs" is not the way it should be. See this story about Mike Pilato in the book "Producing Open Source Software":
http://producingoss.com/en/money-vs-love.html

Gerv

Comment 5

[Norbert Lindenberg]

Thanks for the permission - I'll try not to abuse your trust.

I don't find Gerv's process onerous either now that I know it, but it needs better advertising. Bugzilla itself gives users no clue as to why some items aren't editable, and while digging into the help files, I found documentation on the different permissions, but not on how to upgrade mine. The two people at Mozilla that I asked apparently didn't know that process either; one of them recommended filing this ticket.

Comment 6

[Gervase Markham [:gerv]]

So what happened to bug 179944? Reed, any ideas?

Gerv