On 27 June 2017 at 16:59, Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 10:59 AM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 27 June 2017 at 15:37, Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 9:50 AM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 27 June 2017 at 13:56,  <ru...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>> This is an automated email from the ASF dual-hosted git repository.
>>>>>
>>>>> rubys pushed a commit to branch master
>>>>> in repository https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/whimsy.git
>>>>>
>>>>> The following commit(s) were added to refs/heads/master by this push:
>>>>>      new 6da1346  GUINEAPIGS += jmeter
>>>>> 6da1346 is described below
>>>>>
>>>>> commit 6da1346c3ddf19d15deed0ee469c3f2d78f12bfe
>>>>> Author: Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net>
>>>>> AuthorDate: Tue Jun 27 08:55:43 2017 -0400
>>>>>
>>>>>     GUINEAPIGS += jmeter
>>>>> ---
>>>>>  lib/whimsy/asf/ldap.rb | 2 +-
>>>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/lib/whimsy/asf/ldap.rb b/lib/whimsy/asf/ldap.rb
>>>>> index e0a213a..5c86f78 100644
>>>>> --- a/lib/whimsy/asf/ldap.rb
>>>>> +++ b/lib/whimsy/asf/ldap.rb
>>>>> @@ -970,7 +970,7 @@ module ASF
>>>>>      end
>>>>>
>>>>>      # temp list of projects that have moved over to new project LDAP 
>>>>> schema
>>>>> -    GUINEAPIGS = %w(incubator whimsy)
>>>>> +    GUINEAPIGS = %w(incubator whimsy jmeter)
>>>>
>>>> This could potentially be derived from parsing asf-auth/pit-auth.
>>>>
>>>> I could look at that - unless it's not a good idea?
>>>
>>> It is a good idea, but I'm not certain it is worth it.  After Axis, is
>>> there any reason to wait before doing the rest all at once, and
>>> eliminating this list entirely?
>>
>> Probably OK for PMCs, but I'm not sure that we have tested podlings fully.
>>
>> Especially as far as consumers of the public json files are concerned.
>
> I'm not following, particularly as (a) podlings aren't in the list of
> GUINEAPIGS, and (b) podlings never were in LDAP.  But you don't need
> my permission to proceed - do as you feel best.

Sorry, that was mainly a tangential comment.

The issue is that podlings *are* in projects, but AFAIK there is no
way to distinguish the entries.

At present, only TLPs are in ou=pmc and/or GUINEAPIGS, so it's easy to
create updated versions of

public_ldap_committees.json
public_ldap_groups.json

Other tools rely on these groupings currently (phonebook, projects, reporter).

That's a lot of code to fix.
And I'm not sure the design of the updated public json files has yet
been determined - how are apps supposed to distinguish PPMCs, PMCs and
groups such as comdev?

>>>>>      # List of owners for this committee, i.e. people who are members of 
>>>>> the
>>>>>      # committee and have update access.  Data is obtained from LDAP.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> To stop receiving notification emails like this one, please contact
>>>>> ['"comm...@whimsical.apache.org" <comm...@whimsical.apache.org>'].
>>>
>>> - Sam Ruby
>
> - Sam Ruby

Reply via email to