I am sending the results of the email I sent out and replying to this
conversation, so keep reading :D
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 9:40 PM, Matthew Miller <mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 04:32:57PM -0300, Eduard Lucena wrote:
> > I'm not sure if community / sub-project docs fit into the scope of
> > needing merge rights to assist. Is this correct?
> I don't think so, because they are under Council Docs, so the council
> should be the permissions' holder
Although the goal, of course, is for each the actual subprojects to own
their own spaces -- just for the Council to oversee the top level.
Exactly. This FAS group should just control merge rights for the core
Fedora Docs. The distributed repositories we use should allow subprojects
to directly decide who has commit rights to their docs/information. The
Docs team will just publish that data as written to the website (or report
that we can't publish because of an error and ideally submit a PR to the
original docs to fix the problem).
Reading the responses and thinking about the CI system, I think we should
strongly consider moving to a PR based workflow. This will allow the CI to
do the checking for us. Lots of people want the FAS designation in order
to contribute. Let's make it clear that anyone can contribute by
leveraging the CI and the PR concept.
What do you think?
Results of Email:
The docs FAS group would be the list of people able to merge those PRs and
the entirety of FAS represents the people who can submit those PRs.
I've opened a ticket with the results of the email responses. It contains
the list of people I believe the FAS group should consist of based on
TICKET URL: https://pagure.io/fedora-docs/docs-fp-o/issue/71
I am SUPER MOTIVATED to see that list grow, but I am also glad to have a
better feeling about who is active in our community.
I'll make these changes after the meeting today, barring changes/discussion.
For those interested, I sent out 184 emails.
29 "keep me" replies (including 8 new people)
11 "drop me" replies