Gerrit/Project ownership

__NEWSECTIONLINK__ This page queues individuals' requests to be added to the Gerrit project owner groups for specific Gerrit projects (each of which corresponds to a Git repository). A Gerrit project owner has the power to approve changes for merger into that Gerrit project's master branch, and to veto changes.

"When/how we'll add, remove people from Gerrit project owner groups" has procedural details. Sumana Harihareswara will regularly look at new requests for project owner membership and contact the existing project owners. If there is consensus from the existing project owners, then we'll approve the candidate. For each new candidate the process shouldn't take more than two weeks, and usually much less.

If your codebase/extension/tool isn't in Git yet, use this form to create a new Gerrit project: Git/New repositories

To see the current list of Gerrit project owners for a specific Gerrit project, visit https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/admin/groups/.

Ownership structure
Example: an extension is named foo.
 * The Gerrit group "foo" should usually be an owner of the Gerrit project "foo."
 * Sometimes, meta-groups will be included in the group. This is for people have ownership over multiple extensions, so you can add/remove members in one place.
 * Rights to the group may be inherited from other groups (Look for a "Rights Inherit From:" in the project access.)

Specific example: the project "mediawiki/extensions/DonationInterface" is owned by group "extension-DonationInterface." This group includes the meta-group "fundraising." Also members of the group "mediawiki" has ownership via "Rights Inherit From: "mediawiki/extensions access"

By keeping the naming convention ("extensions/foo" is owned by group "extension-foo"), it'll make the "automatically setup a repo" process much more scriptable when we hit that bridge.

(Note to Gerrit group creators: remember to check the "Make group visible to all registered users." checkbox and leave the group type as "Internal group" and not LDAP.)

= Requests =

[ Add a request]

A bunch of new groups
I'd like to have an $extension-trusted group (initially empty and with no rights assigned) for the following extensions: Validator, Maps, SemanticMaps, Push, LiveTranslate, SubPageList, Spark, IncludeWP, Survey, DidYouKnow, Gitweb (once created), DataValues (once created), Diff, SemanticWatchlist, SemanticImageInput and SemanticBundle.

These groups would be owned by their respective $extension-owner group.

This will allow me to manage my extension myself without posting a request here each time someone should get access :) --Jeroen De Dauw (talk) 19:25, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Comments

 * Support. --siebrand (talk) 16:06, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Since these are non-deployed extensions, I think this is fine. But I'd like to get input from Chad before we start introducing new group structures. --Catrope (talk) 18:02, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't *like* it as proposed since this is very quickly going to explode the number of groups we have. Ideally all extension-$name groups should be owned by an extension-$name-owner (other than deployed exts, perhaps). The reason it's all currently owned by the "Project & Group Creators" was so people could process this page and add new users to their respective groups. What I'd like is either A) A way to manage all groups without giving out admin privs, or B) Multiple owners of groups. The former is probably easier. This all being said, perhaps we can go ahead with this structure for a few non-deployed extensions anyway and see if we really need this page at all for granting access to those. ^demon (talk) 14:05, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Well then I suppose we'd be supportive of adding Jeroen as the owner of all those groups? Also, it seems to me that there are a number of them should be in some metagroup fro SMW. Tychay (talk) 20:56, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Chad, sorry for being obtuse, but when you say "perhaps" is that a go-ahead for me to go ahead and create the "extension-Validator-trusted", "extension-Maps-trusted", etc. Gerrit groups, and when necessary, the "extension-[name]" groups to own the "trusted" groups? Thanks. Sharihareswara (WMF) (talk) 15:44, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Jeroen, I set up the relevant groups for Validator and I think I set them up how you'd like. Is that right? Tried to ping you in IRC, haven't gotten a response -- let me know if that's the right model and I'll do the rest of the groups. Sharihareswara (WMF) (talk) 23:52, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for setting that group up Sumanah. You made the group owner of itself. If this is an acceptable thing to do, then perhaps there is no point in having such extra groups, as you could just make the extension-name groups own themselves, solving the issue with less work and clutter. Think chad had some reason to not do this though. --Jeroen De Dauw (talk) 20:15, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, the reason was that it made it impossible for people in the "Project and Group Creators" group to manage any group member. This is being solved in the near future. ^demon[omg plz] 15:58, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Nischyan branch owner in SemanticMaps
I tried making Nischyan owner of the nischyan branch of SemanticMaps by adding a group he's member of as owner of this branch. I want him to be able to happily merge in stuff without needing approval of someone else. Since this did not work, I tried giving him pretty much all other rights on the branch, but he says he's still not able to approve his own commits. Am I doing something wrong? https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/admin/projects/mediawiki/extensions/SemanticMaps,access
 * -- Jeroen De Dauw (talk) 15:04, 24 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Reviewing commits (Verified+1, CodeReview+2, Submit) needs to be assigned to the appropriate refs/for/* refspace, not the destination ref. Compare and . ^demon (talk) 19:23, 24 September 2012 (UTC)


 * So it should be refs/for/refs/heads/nischyan? --Jeroen De Dauw (talk) 18:26, 28 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes ^demon (talk) 18:21, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

This does not appear to work - can you check the settings to see if they are correct? --Jeroen De Dauw (talk) 18:53, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Creation of a repository for my extension, PreloadContent
I am developing a new extension, Extension:PreloadContent and I want to have my code hosted on MediaWiki repos. --Milad Naseri (talk) 11:09, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Can you please describe this extension in greater detail, or provide a code sample? --ori (talk) 00:40, 28 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I think you're looking for Git/New_repositories. Bawolff (talk) 15:58, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

carlb on extension-SpecialNamespaces
Am attempting initial check-in of extension:SpecialNamespaces (39720) and was sent here to request merge access to the repository to import existing code. I doubt that this extension is deployed on any major site outside the foreign-language Uncyclopedia set, where it originated in 2006 as what should have been a short-lived stopgap. Carlb (talk) 01:44, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
 * From what I understand, this is a non-wmf deployed extension that you intend to be maintainer of? If so, it seems obvious you should have merge rights. Bawolff (talk) 15:56, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Hoo (Marius Hoch) for core
As a steadily active core developer and current maintainer of AbuseFilter and CentralAuth I would really like to extend my focus towards more extensions and of course further help with core code review. Due to this it would come in handy to have merge (+2) rights for both core and all deployed extensions. I have yet merged many AbuseFilter and CentralAuth changes, worked together with Wikimedia Germany (WMDE) and did many code reviews so that I consider myself ready for those rights. Of course I'm aware of the current practices and am carefully with merging (especially non trivial) patches. Due to this I keep announcing breaking changes and I keep staying in contact with Wikimedia Foundation staff

Some links: - Hoo man (talk) 23:37, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Gerrit reviews (all projects)
 * +/- 1s (mediawiki/core)
 * Gerrit changes (mediawiki/core)
 * Gerrit changes (all projects)
 * Bugzilla activity
 * : hoo is terribly helpful. I trust him to know what to merge and when. --MZMcBride (talk) 22:01, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * -- Krenair (talk &bull; contribs) 13:22, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * hoo has been very helpful on CentralAuth and AbuseFilter. He has submitted good patches, and has been helpful working through difficult design issue. CSteipp (talk) 19:31, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * he's done invaluable work on AbuseFilter, CentralAuth, core patches and is helping out with Wikidata. I trust his judgment with +2. Cheers Aude (talk) 15:35, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Matma Rex (talk) 19:38, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Bawolff (talk) 15:59, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * The helpful  one  16:18, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

hexmode / Mark Hershberger for MediaWiki core
I hereby nominate Mark Hershberger as a core maintainer.

Mark (contribs) is our MediaWiki Release Manager. He's in my view a trusted community member, and being responsible for the release of MediaWiki for third parties, he should be able to create branches and tags, and he should be able to merge code into maintained release branches. siebrand (talk) 15:49, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Bawolff (talk) 15:54, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * - he's not already? -- Krenair (talk &bull; contribs) 15:56, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * - Pile on. ^demon[omg plz] 15:56, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * --Jeroen De Dauw (talk) 16:07, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * . vvvt 16:18, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Mark has done a great job for this project in past Petrb (talk) 17:22, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * : I trust Mark to know what to and not to merge. --MZMcBride (talk) 18:54, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * - It'll be important for Mark to have this to support tarball releases. -- RobLa-WMF (talk) 21:28, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * - I'm surprised some of these core nominations didn't already have access. Parent5446 (talk) 21:43, 21 February 2013 (UTC)