Hi, this task lacks basic information: Please explain / link to what "WikiTeq" is. And which extension they maintain.

In T267213#6602910, @Aklapper wrote:

Hi, this task lacks basic information: Please explain / link to what "WikiTeq" is. And which extension they maintain.

@Aklapper Hello, I've added, in the description of this task, URL to the site of WikiTeq.

@tosfos will provide list of extensions, it is reason why I changed status of this task from Open to Stalled.

Someone to do this?

In T267213#6635559, @Kizule wrote:

Someone to do this?

So it's been over a week and no one else has commented or given a thumbs up. I'm going to refer this over to TechCom (cc @daniel as chair) per the policy: "If there is no consensus on a request in Phabricator, it may be referred to TechCom for adjudication."

@Legoktm Oh, I'm sorry. We didn't know that everyone should comment, I didn't see it written anywhere. But okay, I asked the others to comment.

Sorry, I wasn't clear, I meant comments from developers *outside* of WikiTeq.

My mistake @Legoktm, no problem then.

First off: I have worked with WikiTeq before, and they have been contracted by WMF in the past to do work on core and on extensions. I particularly know @Vedmaka to be a competent and diligent MediaWiki developer.

That being said: as far as I understand, this is not a request for +2 rights in the mediawiki group per the privilege policy. Rather, it is a request for WikiTeq to be added to the list of "trusted organisations" per that policy. There is currently no established process for this, I'll bring it up with TechCom.

I'd like to note that per the policy, WikiTeq should not technically have "ownership" of the group, which would allow them to add and remove members directly. The policy states that ownership should be reserved to gerrit admins. However, gerrit admins may add and remove people from groups immediately upon request from the respective trusted organization.

It is not entirely clear from the policy whether that restriction also applies for extensions that are not deployed by WMF. As far as I know, none of the extensions maintained by WikiTeq are deployed by WMF. Is that correct?

As I know, extensions maintained by us aren't deployed in WMF's production.

This request is for creating group on Gerrit which will be able to +2 patches in repositories which WikiTeq (we) maintains, without having to be in the mediawiki group.

Thanks @daniel ! And I agree with everything in your comment. We aren't seeking +2 on mediawiki. We're just asking for a Gerrit group so that we can do a better job of maintaining these and other extensions. I believe that I personally have +2 on all of these extensions, but relying on me to review and +2 patches has turned out to be a bad idea. We're trying to improve our extension maintenance and having this group would be helpful.

I'm fine with not being able to add/remove members directly as this doesn't happen very often.

I can confirm that none of our extensions are deployed by WMF anywhere. At least I'd be shocked if any of them are!

@Legoktm Given the above, please let me know if we should reach out to additional people to support this request.

I don't know if it matters, but I just want to add that I, too, think this group of developers are very well qualified and deserve to have their own Gerrit group.

FWIW, I've worked with @Pastakhov of WikiTeq during the porting of Parsoid from JS to PHP and found them competent and well-qualified.

Hi, is there any progress here?

In T267213#6691189, @Kizule wrote:

Hi, is there any progress here?

In the TechCom meeting last Wednesday, we agreed that WikiTeq can be added as a trusted org, associated with a gerrit group that is charge of extensions maintained by WikiTeq. @tstarling said he'd update the policy page and set up the gerrit group. Another gerrit admin could do it as well.

In T267213#6669371, @ssastry wrote:

FWIW, I've worked with @Pastakhov of WikiTeq during the porting of Parsoid from JS to PHP and found them competent and well-qualified.

Hi @ssastry, thanks :) it was nice to porting of Parsoid from JS to PHP. I always knew it should be in PHP 😎

In T267213#6697149, @tstarling wrote:

Done. Please review the access list to make sure I set it up correctly. For future reference, it would be more useful to have a list of Gerrit usernames rather than Phabricator usernames. Some people do not have their Phabricator account linked to LDAP.

@tstarling is the group owner meant to be the group itself? My understanding of the instructions at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Gerrit/Privilege_policy#Expedited_process_for_trusted_organisations is that groups should be owned by administrators, otherwise the groups would be able to grant access themselves and the list of trusted organizations wouldn't be needed

Change 649920 had a related patch set uploaded (by Zoranzoki21; owner: Zoranzoki21):
[mediawiki/extensions/PreferencesList@refs/meta/config] Add access for WikiTeq group

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/649920

Change 649920 merged by Tim Starling:
[mediawiki/extensions/PreferencesList@refs/meta/config] Add access for WikiTeq group

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/649920