Clarify the commit access policy for l10n hg accounts

[Axel Hecht]

Hi,

http://www.mozilla.org/hacking/commit-access-policy/ isn't all that
clear on what level 1a for l10n hg accounts really means.

De-facto, the current policy is that I vouch for new l10n accounts based
on either a technical review of contributions, or based on
recommendations for existing locale leads, for contributors to their
locales.

If there are no objections, I'd file a bug to get that explicitly
written down, mentioning me as named voucher like for the other modules
in that bucket.

I'd also like to have a header that we can link to.

Thanks

Axel

PS: We're seeing more bugs filed asking for wrong levels with more or
less random people vouching, thus raising that now.

[Gervase Markham]

On 25/05/12 15:54, Axel Hecht wrote:
> http://www.mozilla.org/hacking/commit-access-policy/ isn't all that
> clear on what level 1a for l10n hg accounts really means.

Who is "the module owner or a peer responsible for that tree" for an
l10n tree?

Is it the l10n lead? If so, and you would like to be the person who
vouches for new accounts, then yes, we need to change the policy because
at the moment, the l10n lead could vouch for new accounts.

If it's you, then the policy doesn't need changing.

> I'd also like to have a header that we can link to.

I'm sorry, I don't understand this part.

Gerv

[Axel Hecht]

On 25.05.12 17:47, Gervase Markham wrote:
> On 25/05/12 15:54, Axel Hecht wrote:
>> http://www.mozilla.org/hacking/commit-access-policy/ isn't all that
>> clear on what level 1a for l10n hg accounts really means.
>
> Who is "the module owner or a peer responsible for that tree" for an
> l10n tree?
>
> Is it the l10n lead? If so, and you would like to be the person who
> vouches for new accounts, then yes, we need to change the policy because
> at the moment, the l10n lead could vouch for new accounts.
>
> If it's you, then the policy doesn't need changing.

I'd say it's me. We're handing out permissions for all l10n trees, not
for one particular localization.

Practically speaking, it makes life easier for IT as they have a single
named owner, instead of 100 wiki pages which may or may not be right.

Listening to myself, I should lobby for a back-up for myself here, let
me dig one up.

>> I'd also like to have a header that we can link to.
>
> I'm sorry, I don't understand this part.

Well, I'd like to see an html element of at least the size of SVN and
CVS, and something like
http://www.mozilla.org/hacking/commit-access-policy/#Level%201a%20-%20Localization
to point somewhere, so we can use it in l10n-specific documentation.

Axel

[Gervase Markham]

On 25/05/12 17:23, Axel Hecht wrote:
> I'd say it's me. We're handing out permissions for all l10n trees, not
> for one particular localization.

Great.

>>> I'd also like to have a header that we can link to.
>>
>> I'm sorry, I don't understand this part.
>
> Well, I'd like to see an html element of at least the size of SVN and
> CVS, and something like
> http://www.mozilla.org/hacking/commit-access-policy/#Level%201a%20-%20Localization
> to point somewhere, so we can use it in l10n-specific documentation.

Oh, I see. Done :-)

http://www.mozilla.org/hacking/commit-access-policy/#L10n

(It may be a few minutes before the site updates from SVN.)

Gerv