Philip Brown wrote on 21.01.2010 21:27: > On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Sebastian Kayser <[email protected]> > wrote: >>> Since we ALREADY have a database that keeps track of that sort of >>> thing.. the mantis database... and that information MUST be kept >>> current there.... it doesn't make sense, from the standpoint of "good >>> information management practices" to make another separate database. >>> It would require even more synchronization between things. >>> Simpler is better. >> Currently I can't just grant every maintainer global maintainer >> privileges for easier bug handling in Mantis > > err, what? I dont understand why you even bring that up.
Maintainers can't for example move a bug from a package they own to another package (which they don't own) where the bug might belong to. They are restricted to "their" packages. > Maybe you should look again at the mantis database level setup? > mantis supports both "global manager" priviledges, and > project-specific manager privileges. > that's how we do things right now. "proj-specific mananger" == "owner". > > mantis supports having more than one "proj-specific manager". > > So there would be no fixes needed to mantis itself. > It would need code changes to the package "registration" process,and > changes to the "package web page display" code. Let me try to put it in words again: in Mantis I would like to grant global maintainer privileges to every OpenCSW maintainer so that they can work more freely and more flexible on all bugs and packages. If I do so, Mantis will _automatically_ remove all the project-level maintainer privileges. >From a Mantis privilege perspective the project-level privileges are simply not required any more. However, as we have semantically overloaded these project-level privileges, things fall apart elsewhere: the package to maintainer relationship will vanish. We have seen this happen with Dago when we gave him global privileges. > But both of those things will need changes anyway, if we ever support > multiple people "owning" a package. So while we are at it, the person you called out for (in assistance for refactoring the packages/ and maintainers/ pages) might as well consider to implement a dedicated CSW meta db (meta sounds more heavyweight than it actually is) in order to make things more robust. At least that's what I would hope for, but it's up to him then. Sebastian _______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::.
