[Mageia-dev] maintainers database

[Maarten Vanraes]

Op zaterdag 18 december 2010 12:00:52 schreef Michael scherer:
> On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 11:55:39PM +0100, Romain d'Alverny wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 23:41, Maarten Vanraes
> > 
> > <maarten.vanraes at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > imo, it could be used into mageia-app-db, allthough the purposes are a
> > > bit different.
> > 
> > So it should be a separate component.
> > 
> > > however, if we plan on using ldap to store the maintainership (it would
> > > be more like groups for each package and people being member of
> > > it...), then perhaps it should be in catdap.
> > 
> > I'm not sure this should be put into the LDAP, but I may be wrong. The
> > data model is likely to change often enough (even if not a lot) and
> > queries are likely to be frequent enought, to justify a separate,
> > simple db/app for that. But here again, I may not have all the infos.
> 
> I think we should use a simple sql database for now.
> 
> Even if later, ldap could help use to set ACL, and tree structure for
> packages ( ie, the grouping feature of packages you spoke of ), I think we
> should aim first for a very basic application :
> 
> 1 srpm -> 1 to N maintainers,
> 
> and that's all.
> 
> Later, we can think more thoroughly about this, and likely rewrite.
> But the initial goal was to reuse mdvdb because
> it was the fastest route. So we should not forget about it. If we use a
> quick and dirty django application with basic CRUD to manage that, it
> should be fine.

i'm ok with quick and dirty.

tbh, i would like to have this in ldap; since it's related to groups; 
especially if we will woul mailgroups for each package, the member (or 
uniqueMember) can be used to get all the maintainers for that package, and an 
extra attribute to have a primary maintainer.

in effect: being co-maintainer could even be validated by the primary 
maintainer; if primary maintainer leaves, a co-maintainer can grab the primary 
maintainership; if no maintainers are there, someone can become maintainer 
without checks, and becomes primary maintainer directly. only valid packagers 
can grab maintainership (but novices can too)

packagers should have an ldap attribute for the level: none, novice, full, 
security (where none can be omitted and security means he can do security 
updates)

(if you haven't seen it yet; i'm a fan of having everything directly related 
to auth and groupings of users into an ldap)