This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On 01/14/2013 12:08 PM, Itamar Heim wrote:
On 01/14/2013 10:04 PM, Mike Burns wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-01-14 at 14:37 -0500, Eyal Edri wrote:
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Karsten 'quaid' Wade" <kwade(a)redhat.com>
>>> To: infra(a)ovirt.org
>>> Sent: Monday, January 14, 2013 8:45:32 PM
>>> Subject: Re: JRS CE rpm gerrtit project.
>>> On 01/14/2013 07:43 AM, Itamar Heim wrote:
>>>> On 01/14/2013 04:17 PM, Dave Neary wrote:
>>>>> On 12/20/2012 04:09 PM, Yaniv Dary wrote:
>>>>>> I need to create a new oVirt project for the JRS CE rpm for
>>>>>> I will put a make and spec for this package there. The rpm is
>>>>>> just for
>>>>>> packing their binaries sice they don't have rpm packaging.
>>>>>> Project name 'jasperreports-server-rpm'.
>>>>>> Can you create it please?
>>>>> Where do you need the project created, exactly, please? On Gerrit?=
>>>>> Bugzilla? On the wiki? For the wiki/website, you can add the
>>>>> details for
>>>>> the project yourself. If you need new mailing lists, then please
>>>>> the list name and description.
>>>> i don't think it needs a separate mailing list.
>>>> hopefully bugzilla wise can be with ovirt-reports.
>>>> +1 for creating a repo, will give a couple of days for others to
>>>> before creating one.
>>> Side topic - are we happy with this process for requesting repos?
>>> sending email to the list vs. filing an infrastructure ticket in
>> i think opening a ticket in trac + reason for repo is better.
>> as long as we'll receive an email on it to infra(a)ovirt.org.
> +1 on ticket if we can get emails to work correctly. In the past, I'v=
> moderated the emails that I've seen come in, but there was no
> allow all mails from trac to go through. If we get that solved,
> tickets are definitely better.
I just allowed for emails that don't have explicit destination, and that
lets Trac updates get through - the ticket to make this happen that I
just created is now in the archives:
The value is here:
We need to keep our eyes on things to see if this causes any problems,
such as the increase in spam coming in.
Also, this happens because the default owner for each Component is
infra(a)ovirt.org. We need to be consistent there for anything we want to
all see; if a component has an individual as an owner, this group won't
see new tickets for that component. (That can be OK, depending.)
all "voting" processes are based on emails today (well,
patches which go through gerrit).
(we vote on infra on "technical" repo aspects, say here, since this rep=
is part of the reports subprojects, same for java-sdk). but for a
repo/subproject/concept, we actually go through the board mailing list.=
I see where you are going. From the Infra point of view, should we
decide if a request for a repo is reasonable? Developers know if they
need them, the Board is the decider if something is outside of a simple
repo request, such as the net-new repo/subproject/concept you mention.
By this I mean, I don't think there is any voting to be done by the team.=
By the time a request comes to the Infra team, should it already be
vetted as reasonable and needed?
Karsten 'quaid' Wade, Sr. Analyst - Community Growth
@quaid (identi.ca/twitter/IRC) \v' gpg: AD0E0C41
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----