In T366821#9871127, @thcipriani wrote:

Thanks for adding all the needed info @SCherukuwada

Processing this as a trusted organization add per the privilege policy.

Thanks for adding all the needed info @SCherukuwada

Reasoning as requested by @Reedy

Here's some context that I should have included when I filed the ticket:

(reassigning to me, I asked @SCherukuwada to go ahead and assign me after filing the task)

@SCherukuwada: Setting task status to stalled; please reset to open once all required information (see T366821#9868462) has been provided. Thanks!

Per https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Gerrit/Privilege_policy#Requesting_Gerrit_privileges

(fwiw, as the listed maintainer of CentralAuth, I'd appreciate if people talked to me too when they have any major plans regarding the extension. :/)

@TheDJ thanks for filing the task; @AnneT thanks for adding. Idk if there was a permission issue as well, but, after I checked today, my problem turned out to be exactly as T241268, and the solution too (which is strange, because previously git review did work for me outside of Git Bash). Gotta mention it at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Gerrit/Troubleshooting... (Update: done.)

It seems that @Jack_who_built_the_house could not even submit a patch, even though they are registered and part of the trusted contributor group.

I've added @Jack_who_built_the_house as a member of the wmf-theme repo, but we should keep this open so we can consider a more sensible configuration so we don't have to add people one a time

• Inherits from https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/admin/repos/jsdoc,access but that's a no-op
• Configured to allow particular individuals to push to refs/ (and actual branches, as Owners) and explicitly to merge: https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/admin/groups/d513837abb24d42952f577990e3da74796358d79,members

Done for the mediawiki group.

Context: https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/c/mediawiki/libs/UpdateHistory/+/1021367

In T362866#9725977, @taavi wrote:

In T362866#9725790, @SCherukuwada wrote:

I think ThisDot should be in the table here: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Gerrit/Privilege_policy#Expedited_process_for_trusted_organisations

I'll see about getting CTO approval to add to that list.

No, that should be discussed on wikitech-l@ or some other similar public venue. The formal RFC process for public discussion of such changes was disbanded a while ago but that does not mean that fundamental policies should be changed unilaterally by the Foundation.

(Also, I don't think adding specific WMF vendors to the list is a good idea. In practice the access would be approved by WMF, not the vendor company itself, and the WMF is already a de facto "trusted organization" per that policy for the mediawiki group as the wmf LDAP group is included in there. So if there are WMF staff members/contractors/vendors that need Gerrit access but not full ldap/wmf access, creating a new group like wmf-mediawiki and giving it similar policy and access status as the existing wmde-mediawiki group has should be easier to manage, both to get that policy change approved and from the point of view of a Gerrit administrator handling such requests.)

Hello Taavi,

In T362866#9725790, @SCherukuwada wrote:

I think ThisDot should be in the table here: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Gerrit/Privilege_policy#Expedited_process_for_trusted_organisations

I'll see about getting CTO approval to add to that list.

I think ThisDot should be in the table here: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Gerrit/Privilege_policy#Expedited_process_for_trusted_organisations

Thanks!

Done.

Thanks!

The extension-DeletePagesForGood Gerrit group is owned by Gerrit administrators when in a lot of case they are usually self owned.

Done.

Approved!

Congrats! Done.

In T351972#9363394, @MPGuy2824 wrote:

Note: For Novem's +2 request, a (not-strictly-necessary) mail was sent to wikitech-l.

Note: For Novem's +2 request, a (not-strictly-necessary) mail was sent to wikitech-l.

I'm glad my hardware got fixed before the 1 week period for this got over. @Soda has taken on some major patches within PageTriage and has implemented them nicely. Full support for this +2 request. Use it well.

I support this. As a moderator tools dev, I can say that @Soda has:

• demonstrated a strong understanding of the frontend the Pagetriage extension
• submitted very high quality patches
• been a pleasure to work with in code review