sebb wrote on 12/10/17 10:53 AM: > The committer screen now shows if the id does not appear to be > subscribed to the private@ list for any of the committees to which it > belongs. > > However the marker only appears if the logged-in user has sufficient > karma, i.e. it's their id or they have root or secretary karma.
Members are allowed to see things like this, but we don't have to build the feature it if's too much work (it's rarely needed in general). Committers should *not* have access to subscription data from private@ lists in projects they are not a PMC member on. I personally would be happy to show any PMC members for projectX all subscription data for private@projectX. PMC members understanding if all the PMC is subscribed could be important for a PMC - but there's no need for PMC members to see data about other projects. Does that make sense? Not sure how to implement myself. > > A missing marker could either mean the id is subscribed, or the check > has not been done due to lack of karma. > > It might be better to always show a marker, i.e. is the subbed status: > > - OK > - not subbed > - not known Not subbed vs. not known would be useful, yes; if for no other reason than reducing end user confusion and questions. - Shane > > Alternatively, would be reveal too much private info if the status was > always checked, regardless of user karma? > > These considerations also apply to the committee screen. > Obviously actual mail addresses should not be shown if the user does > not have karma, but would it be wrong to show every committer the sub > status for every committee member? > > S. >
