https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=72459

--- Comment #12 from Jan Zerebecki <[email protected]> ---
(In reply to John F. Lewis from comment #10)
> The ideal of 'you
> need to have the community's trust or sign a legally binding agreement with
> us' seems a rather weird way to manage stuff.

That is not at all how it is nor what I want it to to be. One for sure needs to
be trusted to get access to non-public data. Even more so for system level
access instead of on wiki. That trust is just assessed in a different process
instead of an RfA. The NDA is an additional requirement, not a sufficient one.

(In reply to Vogone from comment #11)
> Besides, as you can see in the comments of the RFC's, a significant part of
> the community voiced their opinion against this group being opened for
> non-staff (as opposed to what originally has been proposed). So "which would
> imply that people who can not be contractually ordered to do something are
> excluded" is true unless another community decision shows otherwise.

You are right. I should have read the actual summary instead of only the
request. 

And I agree with the concerns that it should be more restricted than just any
developer. I was more thinking of people who already have system level access
on production e.g. for doing deployments, debugging, etc. .

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
You are on the CC list for the bug.
_______________________________________________
Wikibugs-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l

Reply via email to