[ocaml-infra] Access rights to ocaml.org's github repo

[Anil Madhavapeddy]

On 20 Jan 2016, at 09:51, Fabrice Le Fessant <Fabrice.Le_fessant at inria.fr> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 5:38 PM Ashish Agarwal <agarwal1975 at gmail.com <mailto:agarwal1975 at gmail.com>> wrote:
> I'd rather we kept the list of direct committers to fewer people, and not keep strictly increasing the size of the list.
> 
> I would feel exactly the opposite way. If ocaml.org <http://ocaml.org/> wants to be seen as a community website, it should have a lot of members from the community. Restricting the number of members a priori means we don't trust the community, and we put all the power in the hands of a few people. Why should we trust them more than other OCaml users ? I have already raised my concern about the lack of democracy in the current governance, the organization is top-down, when a community organization should be bottom-up.

My understanding is that anyone can submit a PR -- it's just merge access that is given to a maintainer.  The line here is pretty blurry, but I would side with being generous with it and dealing with exceptions as they arise.  It's all tracked in Git after all, so everything can be reverted if something does go wrong.  If a maintainer goes "rogue" and makes wide-scale changes, it can all be addressed quite rapidly.

>  
> Mauny is being kept despite not meeting the above criteria, but he meets a different one: the INRIA team should have 1 person on the list since they want to and they own the domain.
> 
> Michel Mauny is not working at Inria, and not in the Gallium team (he is working at ENSTA, working from time to time at IRILL, and a member of ocaml.org <http://ocaml.org/> because he organized OCaml'2014). To the best of my knowledge, I am the only member of Gallium that has had any interest in being part of ocaml.org <http://ocaml.org/>, so the argument is a bit counter-productive, unless you want to support my membership in the project...

My understanding is that Michel got merge access as he was an OCaml Workshop chair, and had to update the pages directly.

>  
> Louis, I have no objection to adding you since you contribute to the community in plenty of ways. However, can you please explain what your contribution to ocaml.org <http://ocaml.org/> has been or will be. Why do you want access?
> 
> Interesting question. Would you actually ask also the current members to write such a statement to back their current membership ?

That's a fair request.

Ashish: Louis' contributions also include opam.ocaml.org via opam2web. I'm keen to see these converge in the longer term, as it's a huge chunk of content that is very separate from the current ocaml.org.

>  
> Regarding listing people's organizations, this was discussed before, and I proposed: people's organization be listed if their contribution to ocaml.org <http://ocaml.org/> is on behalf of that organization. In other words, if you want to add your organization after your name, go ahead.
> 
> The whole point of adding the company is to avoid a company from having too much power over the site, but if it's a choice, then it makes the whole thing useless.

Honestly, the set of people involved here are too small to quibble over this point...

Anil
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ocaml.org/pipermail/infrastructure/attachments/20160120/71a2c985/attachment.html>