On Thursday, June 05, 2014 21:27:36 Colin Watson wrote: > On Thu, Jun 05, 2014 at 12:00:23AM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote: > > Personally, I'm fine with it being in #ubuntu-release. I think we're > > already much too fragmented and people are too comfortable in their own > > corner of the project. > > Thanks for the feedback. That was my inclination too, but I have a > somewhat different perspective as I expect to be processing a bunch of > the queue events regardless of where they end up, so didn't want to > prejudge anyone else. > > > As you know from previous mails, I'm very troubled by the current CI train > > situation with respect to permissions. I believe it is completely > > inconsistent with our governance processes and represents, at best, an > > unknown from a security perspective. No worse than the situation today > > is no comfort for me (and yes, I know it's the same either way, but I > > think this is a critical infrastructure issue - the only reason this > > isn't a Tech Board item right now is it's already on the way to being > > resolved). > > I generally agree with your concerns about making sure that the archive > permission model actually means something. For the time being I'm happy > that a resolution is on its way, but I do intend to keep track of this. > (I was glad to see one relevant upstream developer being prompted by the > earlier conversation on ubuntu-devel into applying for PPU; that seems > like something to encourage.) > > Regardless of how important I think it is, though, I just don't think > it's *relevant* to the RTM plans, as it's independent in a mathematical > sense. It makes no difference whether Ubuntu archive permissions are > being worked around in the primary archive or exactly the same way in a > derived archive with identical permissions, and so I would prefer not to > complicate things by tying the two jobs together; they're each tractable > in isolation, but I'd be concerned about the risk of requiring that we > do both before the RTM date.
I agree. I only mention it for completeness. I only want it kept in mind that "no worse than we have now" is not a synonym for "OK". Thanks, Scott K -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone Post to : ubuntu-phone@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
