Re: [gentoo-pms] Moving PMS hosting

[Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@googlemail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1793 bytes --]

On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 07:57:59 +0200
Ulrich Mueller <ulm@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > As previously discussed,
> 
> Where did such a discussion take place? I'm not aware of any. (Or do
> you mean the one back in April, buried in the tread "Patches for your
> reviewing pleasure"? Its outcome was different.)

It happened the last time access privs started mysteriously
disappearing without any kind of communication.

> > I've created a Github repo which you can find at:
> 
> >     http://github.com/ciaranm/pms
> 
> You shouldn't take such hasty and single-handed decisions. That you
> got your bugzilla access suspended has nothing to do with the PMS
> project.

The problem isn't the access suspension, it's that I find out about it
by trying to log on to bugzilla and get told to look at two bugs that I
can't access, and then am leaked information about it by three different
Gentoo people all of whom say "I'm passing this on from a secret IRC
channel, so don't tell anyone it came from me". It's also because this
isn't the first time that this has happened.

> The question is really what we want PMS to be. If it should be the
> authoritative document describing package manager behaviour and repo
> layout, then there's no alternative to hosting on Gentoo infra. If you
> want it to decline to a "man page" (read the log of the last council
> meeting), then go ahead and move it to Github.

I want it to be somewhere where we can all work on it. That's the
important part.

As the people involved have come clean and admitted their mistake, and
presumably have updated their procedures so it won't happen again, I'll
happily let it slide this time if people prefer. Still, this kind of
thing really doesn't inspire confidence.

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]