Jeremy Stanley wrote:
On 2015-06-03 11:45:57 -0700 (-0700), Joshua Harlow wrote:
[...]
If boris (and friends) will make the needed changes to jenkins or
other to have whatever ACL format (avoid a turing complete
language please)
[...]
The proposal is to introduce Prolog into the Gerrit ACLs to match on
file patterns; that's why I referred to "a turing complete
language." These would necessarily be baked into each project's ACL
that needed to use them, and would be up to the Infra project-config
reviewers to review any time the directory structure within a
project changes and impacts the per-project custom scripting
required to support it.
Sounds overly complex for a bunch of regex filters.
---
.coder_acls (even place this in the repo itself?)
/rally
- rally-core
/rally/code/*
- rally-code-core
/rally/blah-blah/*
- rally-blah-blah-core
I don't know if thats easy or not, but prolog seems like way overkill.
This was already discussed in IRC and the Infra PTL suggested to
"dry-run" the model before dragging in new parts of Gerrit we've not
been using yet. The suggestion was to start a mailing list thread to
see if other projects had similar conceptual models they were
following so as to try and build consensus, not to appeal to the
community in an attempt to get them to counter our advice about
throwing new technical solutions at a problem (and necessarily
increasing the burden on us) before figuring out if it even makes
sense as something we should spend our limited person-hour resources
supporting.
Understood, although maybe this model will work for rally (and if boris
does most of the gerrit work, that's great to). I don't feel like
consensus will happen here, and that really what needs to happen is an
experiment with results (did it or didn't it work out for rally). If it
does, that's great, if it doesn't, that's great to (lessons learned). I
start to feel that always trying to reach consensus on everything
(especially when this is new territory, that may work out just fine for
rally in the end...) limits the span of what the community can envision,
and without a ability to think outside of the box or let others try
experiments that broaden all of our horizons, we are dead in the water
(overly dramatic I know)...
Keep in mind, we went into the Liberty Design Summit with plenty of
backlog, and came out with even more priorities to tackle. Is
support for this something the community would like to see us
spending our time on _instead_ of some of those other priorities?
Maybe others not in infra can do most of the work? If we have issues
scaling the infra team (do we?), that might just be a different issue
that this rally request is scratching the surface of that should be
brought up and resolved?
-Josh
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
