core-dev write permissions to documentation branches?

[Matthew East]

On 29 August 2011 11:38, Jeremy Bicha <jbicha at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> On 27 August 2011 02:54, Matthew East <mdke at ubuntu.com> wrote:
>> On 27 August 2011 04:51, Jeremy Bicha <jbicha at ubuntu.com> wrote:
>>> ScottK asked today whether core-dev should have write access to the
>>> documentation branches. He was specifically asking about the server-guide
>>> since that is only distributed on help.ubuntu.com so it's relatively low
>>> risk.
>>>
>>> It sounds like a reasonable request to me, seeing as we trust core-dev with
>>> nearly everything in Ubuntu.
>>>
>>> So should core-dev be a member of ubuntu-core-doc?
>>
>> Yes, I think it is a reasonable request too. I have two possible
>> concerns though. First, given that good developers aren't necessarily
>> good documentation writers (although they may be!), can we ensure that
>> people committing to the branch are following our practices properly
>> and validating the documentation markup? Second, if we add core-dev to
>> core-doc, would we be exposing the core-dev team to a bunch of bug
>> reports, merge requests and commit emails which the core-doc team gets
>> on a regular basis, or would those emails not go to a subteam? Does
>> anyone know enough about Launchpad's setup to resolve that issue?
>
> Maybe we should just add core-dev members on an as-requested basis.
> What should the threshold for membership be? Is one accepted patch
> sufficient for core-dev contributors?

I don't have a problem with adding core-dev members on request - after
all as you say, they already have access to everything in Ubuntu, so
our bzr branches should probably not be any different. Unless other
teams with upstream bzr branches have a better way of handling the
permissions.

However many core-dev members may not wish to receive all of our bug
mail and commit messages and therefore could be reluctant to join the
team. So probably we should also find an alternative solution as well.

When it comes to packaging improvements, it should be reasonably
simple for core developers to put up a branch merge request which can
be merged (bearing in mind that we set the Vcs-Bzr field in
debian/control), so I really think that this issue applies principally
to the significant patches which we have been seeing recently from
server team members to the serverguide, I think we need to give the
server team an option to have more access to the serverguide, while at
the same time ensuring that the quality of documentation and markup
doesn't decrease. This probably can be achieved by appointing a
core-doc member who is willing to act as a maintainer of the
serverguide to replace Adam. If there are volunteers from the server
team for this job, then we could work to get them membership of
core-doc as soon as possible. It's great to see a lot of work going
into the serverguide at the moment and it would be great to capitalise
on that by adding new maintainers.

I'm copying the server team mailing list for their thoughts.

-- 
Matthew East
http://www.mdke.org
gnupg pub 1024D/0E6B06FF