On Wed, Jul 08, 2020 at 09:25:32AM +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 10:38:01AM -0700, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> > Should we make the script more robust and ignore invalid watcher
> > emails? Seems worrying if someone who's not even a packager can block
> > packager changes from being reflected in Bugzilla.
> As you can see in this JSON there is no difference between maintainers and
> watchers, so the script syncing to bugzilla does not have this information.
> I think that asking FESCo for a policy on how to deal with this + an automated
> way to detect this situation (which we didn't really have so far) may be
> sufficient. However, if this situation happens too frequently, and leads to 
> too
> much manual work to clean things up, we may need to see about somehow adding
> this information to the JSON file and teaching the script the difference.
> It would increase the load on bugzilla though :(

In the ideal world, we would just add checks so that people couldn't get
into this state. But thats going to require a lot of coordination/those
checks might be very difficult right now. I wonder though, if we could
get the new account system to help us here: I think there was a plan to
have it allow for a 'bugzilla email'. Could it perhaps also verify the
bugzilla email and have some 'bugzilla ok' property? 

Then, pagure could check it before allowing someone to watch/own/be
point of contact on a package and tell them to go set it before


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 

Reply via email to