Julien Danjou wrote:
On Wed, Apr 01 2015, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
Responsibilities not tied to specific controls in our tools do exist
in abundance, but they tend to be more fluid and ad-hoc because in
most cases there's been no need to wrap authorization/enforcement
around them. What I worry is happening is that as a community we're
enshrining the arbitrary constructs which we invented to be able to
configure our tools sanely. I see this discussion as an attempt to
recognize those other responsibilities as well, but worry that
creation of additional unnecessary authorization/enforcement process
will emerge as a "solution" and drive us further into pointless
bureaucracy.
+1
We never used so fine grained ACLs in Ceilometer.
If a person knows enough about the project, sounds responsible and is
helping, then I'm giving him/her the rights to help the project. Which
usually includes all the right so that person is not blocked by some ACL
if he/she wants suddenly to give his/her advice on a piece of code or
triage some bugs.
I've never seen big mistakes, and we don't have a lot of unrecoverable
mistakes. In the end I prefer to give forgiveness than permission.
+1
Thank you thank you thank you for being a good/decent human :)
(I also prefer to do the same...)
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
