Just wondering - do the old mail archives support this, or is it any IPMC
member can access the podling private lists (and the PPMCs can't?)
If the PPMCs can... can we just replicate that permission?
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 9:29 PM Sam Ruby wrote:
> On 2016-09-02 12:41 (-0400), Sam Ruby wrote:
On 2016-09-02 12:41 (-0400), Sam Ruby wrote:
>
> Longer term this change would lay the groundwork for more fine-grained
> access control whereever it may be desired: not just for svn, but also
> for web pages, git, and any other location that can be configured to use
> LDAP to obtain ACL info
On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 9:17 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
> cc += gstein
>
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 9:55 PM, Stian Soiland-Reyes
> wrote:
> > Did this conclude..? Just in case it didn't, here's my +1 as well to
> > make podling membership be in proper LDAP groups; with email
> > notifications to private
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 12:08 PM, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote:
> Does means podlings will also need to define both a $podling and
> $podling-pmc group?
It doesn't require that... it doesn't preclude that. My original
proposal was not to add that separation, but such could be handled if
it were des
Does means podlings will also need to define both a $podling and
$podling-pmc group?
Many podlings don't have a clear distinction - at least not in listings.
Perhaps they should..
On 22 Sep 2016 3:17 a.m., "Sam Ruby" wrote:
> cc += gstein
>
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 9:55 PM, Stian Soiland-Reyes
Actually adding gstein this time.
- Sam Ruby
On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 10:17 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
> cc += gstein
>
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 9:55 PM, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote:
>> Did this conclude..? Just in case it didn't, here's my +1 as well to
>> make podling membership be in proper LDAP grou
cc += gstein
On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 9:55 PM, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote:
> Did this conclude..? Just in case it didn't, here's my +1 as well to
> make podling membership be in proper LDAP groups; with email
> notifications to private@podling as you mention.
This did not conclude, but you picked
Did this conclude..? Just in case it didn't, here's my +1 as well to
make podling membership be in proper LDAP groups; with email
notifications to private@podling as you mention.
(I am lucky enough to have faced the asf-authorization-template a
couple of times :) )
Ensuring people.apache.org is u
On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 12:49 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 12:42 PM Sam Ruby wrote:
>
>> The first stage would be migrating existing lists to LDAP. This will
>> require some small changes to whimsy and the phone book application.
>> The whole effort will only take a few hours
On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 1:06 PM, Mark Thomas wrote:
> On 02/09/2016 17:41, Sam Ruby wrote:
>> To prepare, we will need to decide who gets to modify these lists, and
>> who gets notified. I propose that members of podlings be able to modify
>> the list, and the private list associated with that pod
On 02/09/2016 17:41, Sam Ruby wrote:
> To prepare, we will need to decide who gets to modify these lists, and
> who gets notified. I propose that members of podlings be able to modify
> the list, and the private list associated with that podling be notified
> on changes. Alternate choices would i
On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 12:42 PM Sam Ruby wrote:
> For background, if you go to the Apache phonebook
> (https://people.apache.org/phonebook.html) and click on the "Podling
> name" input field and click on enter you will see an incomplete list of
> podlings. If you click on a podling, you will see
For background, if you go to the Apache phonebook
(https://people.apache.org/phonebook.html) and click on the "Podling
name" input field and click on enter you will see an incomplete list of
podlings. If you click on a podling, you will see a list of members for
that podling.
The ultimate so
13 matches
Mail list logo
