I just checked and there are very few admins around Ben Walding to manage administrative tasks * Bob McWhirter * Brett Porter * Olivier Gaudin * Stephen Connolly * and me
Perhaps this is something to discuss with Ben about Codehaus systems management ? Perhaps he may need some help if we consider that the process delay is too long ... On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 9:24 PM, Robert Scholte <codeh...@sourcegrounds.com> wrote: > Hi, > > If you compare the differences between Apaches PMC and teammembers, then > the difference between a Codehaus despot and teammember is much smaller. > Teammembers already have a lot of rights for the infrastructure[1], > there's no such thing as binding votes. Main difference between a despot > and a teammember is that Xircles gives you extra options to manage users > for the project. So actually you become your own secretary ;) > > The problem Dan was facing won't disappear when we have more despots. So > if we want a new Jira-project, we still depend on Jira Admins. > > Robert > > [1] http://mojo.codehaus.org/development/codehaus-support.html > > Op Wed, 03 Sep 2014 18:37:25 +0200 schreef Arnaud Héritier < > aherit...@codehaus.org>: > > > There is something to take care. Being despot doesn't give us the jira >> administration privilege required to create new projects. >> The thing to do is to ask to Ben if we could have more Jira admins to >> create these projects. >> >> (And yes +1 to have more despots too) >> >> >> On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 6:20 PM, Dan Tran <dant...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> +1 for more Depots >>> >>> I have been with this project since beginning, will be glad helping out >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> -D >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 9:16 AM, Baptiste Mathus <bapti...@codehaus.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>> I think that if this discussion is raised only because it's difficult to >>>> have a despot create the project in jira, then we may just want to have >>>> more despots. Changing the release process not because it's having an >>>> issue >>>> in itself seems wrong to me. >>>> >>>> Like Arnaud, I also think it's a wee bit better to have a dedicated >>>> project when out of pre-release state. >>>> >>>> My 2 cents >>>> Le 3 sept. 2014 10:00, "Arnaud Héritier" <aherit...@codehaus.org> a >>>> écrit : >>>> >>>> I would prefer to have a jira project per mojo when they are stable >>>> >>>>> AFAIK I'm always despot + jira administrator and can create projects if >>>>> you need but don't hesitate to ping me directly because I'm not >>>>> reading all >>>>> mojo MLs threads >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 9:39 AM, Anders Hammar <and...@hammar.net> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> One problem is that the JIRA URL is on the produced mojo site, so >>>>>> creating the JIRA project after the release requires a new release to >>>>>> update the site. >>>>>> >>>>>> /Anders >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 9:31 AM, Dan Tran <dant...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Correct >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -Dan >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Tuesday, September 2, 2014, Anders Hammar <and...@hammar.net> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Not sure what you mean. Do you want to make a 1.0 release without a >>>>>>>> mojo specific JIRA project? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> /Anders >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Dan Tran <dant...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Currently in order for a component to become 1.0, it just have a >>>>>>>>> Jira project. So far we have a hard time getting depot to manage >>>>>>>>> this >>>>>>>>> procedure. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Could we just mangen it like the way Jenkins does with plugin? a >>>>>>>>> component id is just good enough >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -Dan >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: > > http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email > > >
