← Back to team overview

launchpad-dev team mailing list archive

Re: Archive management plans for phone RTM


On Thu, Jun 05, 2014 at 12:00:23AM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> Personally, I'm fine with it being in #ubuntu-release.  I think we're already 
> much too fragmented and people are too comfortable in their own corner of the 
> project.

Thanks for the feedback.  That was my inclination too, but I have a
somewhat different perspective as I expect to be processing a bunch of
the queue events regardless of where they end up, so didn't want to
prejudge anyone else.

> As you know from previous mails, I'm very troubled by the current CI train 
> situation with respect to permissions.  I believe it is completely 
> inconsistent with our governance processes and represents, at best, an unknown 
> from a security perspective.  No worse than the situation today is no comfort 
> for me (and yes, I know it's the same either way, but I think this is a 
> critical infrastructure issue - the only reason this isn't a Tech Board item 
> right now is it's already on the way to being resolved).

I generally agree with your concerns about making sure that the archive
permission model actually means something.  For the time being I'm happy
that a resolution is on its way, but I do intend to keep track of this.
(I was glad to see one relevant upstream developer being prompted by the
earlier conversation on ubuntu-devel into applying for PPU; that seems
like something to encourage.)

Regardless of how important I think it is, though, I just don't think
it's *relevant* to the RTM plans, as it's independent in a mathematical
sense.  It makes no difference whether Ubuntu archive permissions are
being worked around in the primary archive or exactly the same way in a
derived archive with identical permissions, and so I would prefer not to
complicate things by tying the two jobs together; they're each tractable
in isolation, but I'd be concerned about the risk of requiring that we
do both before the RTM date.

Colin Watson                                       [cjwatson@xxxxxxxxxx]

Follow ups