On 02/23/2016 04:28 PM, Matthieu Huin wrote: > Pros: > - quick solution to a problem we've had for a while
I disagree, that is far from being quick and it's quite a disruptive
change imo. Managing project through a config-repo needs a file
structure to cleverly describe projects, e.g.:
"sf":
ptl: {name: ..., irc: ..., email: ...}
irc-channell: ...
description: ...
url: ... (for pages controller)
tags: lxc-based-ci, nested-rdo-ci
deliverables:
'image': {repos: ['software-factory', ], ci: 'functional-tests'}
'client': {repos: ['python-sfmanager', ] ci: 'unit-test'}
'server': {repos: ['managesf', ]}
That story would be 3.x materials since it's a breaking change.
> Cons:
> - will collide with roles management that we are bound to have at some point
> (but not in a near future sadly)
Why not define roles along the project description ? (as proposed above,
the ptl and core groups could be listed there)
> - you need to give commit rights on the config repos for it to be fully
> usable.
Everyone should be able to propose config-repo change, only admin should
be able to approve... Isn't that the case already ?
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Softwarefactory-dev mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/softwarefactory-dev
