libc-hack policy

libc-hack policy

[Petr Baudis]

  Hello!

  Is it possible to change libc-hack policy so that the subscription is
open to all but posting is still restricted to the same set of people as
now? Or is there a technical restriction that prevents this with the
current list software? (It's probably not a too big deal if it isn't
possible, but it would be good to have a clear picture here.)

  Thank you,

-- 
				Petr "Pasky" Baudis
A lot of people have my books on their bookshelves.
That's the problem, they need to read them. -- Don Knuth

Re: libc-hack policy

[Ulrich Drepper]

Whoa, stop it.  There is nothing broken.  No change needed.

-- 
➧ Ulrich Drepper ➧ Red Hat, Inc. ➧ 444 Castro St ➧ Mountain View, CA ❖

Re: libc-hack policy

[Christopher Faylor]

On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 04:00:00PM +0100, Petr Baudis wrote:
>Is it possible to change libc-hack policy so that the subscription is
>open to all but posting is still restricted to the same set of people
>as now?  Or is there a technical restriction that prevents this with
>the current list software?  (It's probably not a too big deal if it
>isn't possible, but it would be good to have a clear picture here.)

You're asking system administrators to change mailing list policy.  We
don't do that.

Since Ulrich has indicated that he doesn't want to change the policy we
won't be changing the policy.

cgf

Re: libc-hack policy

[Petr Baudis]

On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 11:55:06AM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 04:00:00PM +0100, Petr Baudis wrote:
> >Is it possible to change libc-hack policy so that the subscription is
> >open to all but posting is still restricted to the same set of people
> >as now?  Or is there a technical restriction that prevents this with
> >the current list software?  (It's probably not a too big deal if it
> >isn't possible, but it would be good to have a clear picture here.)
> 
> You're asking system administrators to change mailing list policy.  We
> don't do that.
> 
> Since Ulrich has indicated that he doesn't want to change the policy we
> won't be changing the policy.

I'm asking for input into ongoing discussion, where it was claimed by
Roland (who otherwise said "There is no reason not to allow read-only
subscriptions, sure--there are no secrets there, of course." and Carlos
suggested that I should ask you if it's technically possible, so I'm
just doing that...

-- 
				Petr "Pasky" Baudis
A lot of people have my books on their bookshelves.
That's the problem, they need to read them. -- Don Knuth

Re: libc-hack policy

[Ulrich Drepper]

On 11/13/2009 10:23 AM, Petr Baudis wrote:
> I'm asking for input into ongoing discussion, where it was claimed by
> Roland (who otherwise said "There is no reason not to allow read-only
> subscriptions, sure--there are no secrets there, of course." and Carlos
> suggested that I should ask you if it's technically possible, so I'm
> just doing that...

You asking for others to do work even though there is no reason 
whatsoever.  There is no reason for a change.

-- 
➧ Ulrich Drepper ➧ Red Hat, Inc. ➧ 444 Castro St ➧ Mountain View, CA ❖

sourceware.org shell access

[Petr Baudis]

  Hi!

  I'm the release manager for glibc 2.11 branch and in order to be able
to publish releases, apparently I need full shell acess on
sourceware.org, thus I'd like to ask for this; currently, I already have
git-only shell account 'pasky'. I will just need to use gnupload to the
machine I think, if there're multiple permission levels.

  Thank you,

-- 
				Petr "Pasky" Baudis
A lot of people have my books on their bookshelves.
That's the problem, they need to read them. -- Don Knuth

Re: sourceware.org shell access

[Christopher Faylor]

On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 02:34:13AM +0100, Petr Baudis wrote:
>  Hi!
>
>  I'm the release manager for glibc 2.11 branch and in order to be able
>to publish releases, apparently I need full shell acess on
>sourceware.org, thus I'd like to ask for this; currently, I already have
>git-only shell account 'pasky'. I will just need to use gnupload to the
>machine I think, if there're multiple permission levels.

We just provided shell access to Andreas Schwab.  Why do so many
people in the glibc project need shell access?

cgf

Re: sourceware.org shell access

[Roland McGrath]

> We just provided shell access to Andreas Schwab.  Why do so many
> people in the glibc project need shell access?

We have a maintainer independently responsible for each release stream.
Currently Andreas and Petr are both responsible for active streams.  Over
time, the number of active streams will wax and wane, and it's likely we'll
have fewer individual maintainers than individual streams in the long run.
But the number and identity of those people will vary, and possibly change
on the order of twice a year.  

These maintainers do not especially need shell access on sourceware.  They
need access to maintain the sourceware ftp space under glibc/releases/.  As
far as I know, a restricted access that made this possible would be fine
for both Andreas and Petr, and for future such individuals.

If it is for some reason a severe imposition either to maintain a few
account privileges once or twice a year, or to trust with shell access the
people that the glibc project trusts, then we can try to figure out some
other mechanism.  (i.e., if you really give us a hard time, then I will set
up some cron jobs in my sourceware account to rsync from one or more places
where the people I trust can maintain files for the sourceware ftp area.)


Thanks,
Roland

Re: sourceware.org shell access

[Petr Baudis]

  Hi!

On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 04:04:06PM -0800, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > We just provided shell access to Andreas Schwab.  Why do so many
> > people in the glibc project need shell access?
> 
> We have a maintainer independently responsible for each release stream.

  Is there any progress with the request?

  Thank you,

				Petr "Pasky" Baudis