Derek Cicero wrote: > > Mark, > > I am not totally parsing this, so let me try and work through your > case and see if that helps. > > You were a "Leader" for ARC in the old site (Correct?). > > You are now a "Contributor" in the Community Group ARC in Auth. > > After the role name change discussed in the previous mail, your role > name will be listed as "Affiliate", not "Contributor", in Auth. > > XWiki's interpretation of the 'Affiliate' role gives you most of the > editing rights you had as a "Leader" on the old site (you can't delete > pages and you can't edit the panels). For certain definitions of "most of the editing rights", all correct. > > If you receive a "Core Contributor" grant from the ARC Community Group > in the future, that role will be reflected in the ARC Electorate. > > If a "Leader" in the ARC community makes you a "Leader" so that you > can delete pages or edit panels, it will have no bearing on the "Core > Contributor" grant mentioned above. Ah, ok, the meat of the matter. This is possible? Someone on XWiki can grant me this additional (or elevated) role in XWiki with absolutely no impact nor bearing nor dependency on what Auth reports? Is is possible to have a "Leader" role on Xwiki while having absolutely no CC grants in any community? It's highly likely this will be my status come September. Do I go chasing folks to get me that extra symbolic term so I can continue doing what I was doing, or do I accept the regression and move on to better things?
Out of curiosity: does the reverse also hold, or will there really be ~100 "Leaders" in OS/Net? BTW, I've not gotten an answer on whether the "community" is really a stakeholder here. The answer so far has been, 1 role in auth = 1 role in XWiki. All requests to the contrary seem to get the same answer. This is eerily familiar to the arc.OS.o debacle.
