On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 9:10 AM, Aaron Halfaker <[email protected]> wrote:
> Is there a clearly good reason that we need to continue this review > process? If not, I find it very frustrating that we're slowing things down > so much because of imagined boogie-men. The idea of > permission-just-in-case-someone-does-a-bad-thing is opposed to the wiki > model of keeping things as open as possible and addressing problems as they > happen. In the meantime, we're encouraging bad behavior by making the > OAuth system such a pain to work with. I understand that you're doing this > in your free time csteipp, but the pain of delays is still inflicted on > tool developers all the same. Maybe it is inappropriate that such a key > infrastructure (and official requirement for Labs-based tools) is left up > to volunteer time of someone who is apparently overworked. > > I'm very happy for other people to join this process. I believe there's an open bug about making approvals automatic for non-controversial rights. Patches welcome. > 1. How long is this transition process supposed to take? > Not defined yet. > 2. Should I start making my argument to the Stewards now? > About what? If you have something that's not controversial, ping one of the admins, and I'm sure you can get your Consumer approved today. > 3. Is there a public conversation about this transition that I can > participate in? > > The RFC is the correct place. The Stewards are just getting back from travelling so I don't think we've started updating it to account for our conversations last week, but that is where we will work out the details. _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
