Local Owners as a virtual group

[Martin Wallgren]

Hi,

Would you be open to a patch that adds another virtual group called "Local Owners" in a similar way to "Project Owners"?
The "Local Owners" group would contain all users with owner access in a project without looking in the parent projects.

The concept of local owners is not new, it already exist in ProjectState as the member localOwners.

The use case we are trying to solve is to be able to add "Local Owners" as reviewers. With the reviewers plugin it would then be possible to specify "Local Owners" as reviewers in a parent project, and all child projects would get their own "Local Owners" as reviewers without the need for a separate reviewers.config in each project.

Side note: Adding "Project Owners" as a reviewer in the reviewers plugin works, so my thought is that if we just get "Local Owners" as a virtual group in core, the reviewers plugin should just work.

[Luca Milanesio]

On 19 Feb 2018, at 23:15, Martin Wallgren <martin....@axis.com> wrote:

Hi,

Would you be open to a patch that adds another virtual group called "Local Owners" in a similar way to "Project Owners"?
The "Local Owners" group would contain all users with owner access in a project without looking in the parent projects.

"Local" is misleading IMHO.

Direct Owners sounds better.

Actually the "getOwners()" method already returns this information.

The concept of local owners is not new, it already exist in ProjectState as the member localOwners.

The use case we are trying to solve is to be able to add "Local Owners" as reviewers. With the reviewers plugin it would then be possible to specify "Local Owners" as reviewers in a parent project, and all child projects would get their own "Local Owners" as reviewers without the need for a separate reviewers.config in each project.

So you basically want to have a "magic rule" that refers to the direct owners of the project that doesn't contain the inherited ones.

Side note: Adding "Project Owners" as a reviewer in the reviewers plugin works, so my thought is that if we just get "Local Owners" as a virtual group in core, the reviewers plugin should just work.

Should not this be a fix to the reviewers plugin? The ProjectState already makes this difference between the getOwners() and getAllOwners(): why don't you just use that in the reviewers plugin?

--
--
To unsubscribe, email repo-discuss...@googlegroups.com
More info at http://groups.google.com/group/repo-discuss?hl=en

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Repo and Gerrit Discussion" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to repo-discuss...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Martin Wallgren]

On 02/20/2018 04:12 PM, Luca Milanesio wrote:

On 19 Feb 2018, at 23:15, Martin Wallgren <martin....@axis.com> wrote:

Hi,

Would you be open to a patch that adds another virtual group called "Local Owners" in a similar way to "Project Owners"?
The "Local Owners" group would contain all users with owner access in a project without looking in the parent projects.

"Local" is misleading IMHO.

Direct Owners sounds better.

Either is ok by me. I chose Local since that is what it is called in ProjectState.

Actually the "getOwners()" method already returns this information.

The concept of local owners is not new, it already exist in ProjectState as the member localOwners.

The use case we are trying to solve is to be able to add "Local Owners" as reviewers. With the reviewers plugin it would then be possible to specify "Local Owners" as reviewers in a parent project, and all child projects would get their own "Local Owners" as reviewers without the need for a separate reviewers.config in each project.

So you basically want to have a "magic rule" that refers to the direct owners of the project that doesn't contain the inherited ones.

Yes, exactly as the  "Project owners" virtual group refers to all owners.

Side note: Adding "Project Owners" as a reviewer in the reviewers plugin works, so my thought is that if we just get "Local Owners" as a virtual group in core, the reviewers plugin should just work.

Should not this be a fix to the reviewers plugin? The ProjectState already makes this difference between the getOwners() and getAllOwners(): why don't you just use that in the reviewers plugin?

My first instinct was also to fix this in the reviewers plugin only, but with a virtual group in core it means that it can be used anywhere groups can be
used.