kubuntu-council team mailing list archive

[Valorie Zimmerman <valorie-zimmerman@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 5:50 AM, Rik Mills <rikmills@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I sadly have some concerns regarding Simon Quigley's actions and push
> access to git and ppas.
>
> There have now been several 'incidents', including.
>
> (1) On 18th Oct 2017 after having been asked not to practice changes on
> our git LP repos by Clive, Simon pushed all yakkety_archive branches to
> master branches.
>
> (2) On 7th Nov 2017 Simon deliberately deleted ECM and other critical
> build depends from the KCI ppa during the nightly build, breaking the
> builds. He was not able to give a reasonable explanation for his actions.
>
> (3) On Jan 8/9th he prepared a "surprise" for us by staging without
> consultation frameworks 5.30.
>
> This was despite again Clive asking Simon NOT to push anything.
>
> This was inevitably broken as the issues here:
>
> https://trello.com/c/J5w6GdXP/246-cleaning-up-the-road-for-frameworks-5-29
>
> regarding frameworks 5.29 are still largely unresolved.
>
> Simon was aware of this, as several weeks previously when Simon was keen
> to stage 5.29, this was pointed out to him.
>
> Also it is clear that as there were no appropriate commits regarding
> package lists and dependencies to kubuntu automation,  the workflow in
> KA readme was ignored.
>
> While I like Simon immensely, this series of incidents in my mind calls
> into question the appropriateness of Simon's ongoing git an ppa push
> access. Especially after incident (2) where he reassured us that there
> would be no such repeat and that he would act responsibly.
>
> Rik

After extensive discussion in #kubuntu-council (public channel, join
us!) we've concluded that

1. Ninja status for Simon will be withdrawn until he meets with the
Kubuntu Devels and satisfies them that permission should be restored;
and

2. That we need a change in Kubuntu Policy about the git permissions
granted to all Kubuntu Members.

Therefore, I move and place before the Kubuntu Council the following:

I move to amend the Kubuntu Policies
(https://community.kde.org/Kubuntu/Policies) by changing

"Members, while not having any upload or bug control permissions, are
meant to be trustworthy and act in the best interest of the project.
~kubuntu-members consequently also are members of all other Kubuntu
teams that do not have additional requirements other than trust."

to "Members, while not having any git or bug control permissions, are
meant to be trustworthy and act in the best interest of the project.
~kubuntu-members consequently also are members of all other Kubuntu
teams that do not have additional requirements other than trust."

Once we change the policy, we can remove

In addition, I believe that we should evaluate which of the
memberships that https://launchpad.net/~kubuntu-members reports are
relevant and should stay:

“Kubuntu Members” is a member of these teams:
KDevelop
Kubuntu CI
Tomahawk
Kubuntu Users
Kubuntu Bugs
Kubuntu Members - KDE 4 Repository
Planet Ubuntu
Ubuntu Members
Kubuntu Packagers
Users of the Ubuntu Etherpad instance

Given that not all Kubuntu Members are packagers, perhaps some of
these should be revoked? Specifically: KDevelop, Kubuntu CI, Tomahawk,
Kubuntu Members - KDE 4 Repository and Kubuntu Packagers.

Let's thrash this out here before making the changes and announcing
them on Kubuntu-devel.

Thanks,

Valorie