Add Grin access rights #426
Conversation
|
I own currently the GRIN Discord server. |
|
Does it make sense to include the full list of active council members on this doc also? I couldn't find the list on any public document. |
| - [Mac](https://forum.grin.mw/u/neo/summary) | ||
|
|
||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Need to include https://twitter.com/grincouncil
|
I have custody of grinwallet@protonmail.com if anyone wants to use it (for a legit cause, hah) |
|
IIRC, |
Reddit is missing from the list? Though I do believe it was recently resolved, would be useful to include it here |
| Owner of grin.mw domain name: | ||
|
|
||
| - Grin domain name is originally owned by a community member [0xb100d](https://forum.grin.mw/u/0xb100d). | ||
| - The username and password are shared among the council members using a SSS (Shamir Secret Sharinng) scheme. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Which username and password? 0xb100d's?
|
|
||
| ### Organization Members, Status and Teams Membership | ||
|
|
||
| | Username | Status | Teams | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
My understanding is that there is no hierarchy among github owners. This means that we could remove inactive contributors from the list of owners, including @ignopeverell. I think this would be wise. It would be trivial to add them back if they ever returned.
It's probably easiest if I just make a specific proposal, and then everyone can critique it and propose changes:
-
Promote @tromp, @j01tz, and @phyro to owner (assuming each plans on continuing to being active in the community for the foreseeable future).
-
Remove @antiochp, @garyyu, @hashmap, @ignopeverell, @jaspervdm, @nijynot, @lehnberg, and @yeastplume. We would gladly restore the privileges for every one of them if they choose to return, but for security purposes, it makes little sense to grant privs to so many inactive contributors.
EDIT: Removed request to grant myself merge privileges. It's unnecessary if @phyro and others are given ownership of the org.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Agreed on additional ownership, but for ownership removal, I'd grant a 6 month inactivity window out of courtesy. That would be keep @antiochp, @lehnberg and @jaspervdm on a little longer. The others I think have not been active in the last 6 months, and can be removed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I agree with both of you. Would make sense to me to do the following:
- Promote @tromp, @j01tz, and @phyro to owner. If they want to.
- Remove @garyyu, @hashmap, @ignopeverell and @yeastplume.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm also fine. Did you forget nijynot on the remove list or were they left in on purpose?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I can take the responsibility as well. I don't have a lot of time these days but will always make time for Grin as needed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd grant a 6 month inactivity window out of courtesy.
As mentioned in keybase, I don't think it's discourteous to remove them while they're inactive. We would gladly add them back if they returned. But giving privileges to people who don't need them is just bad security policy.
I think it's clear that Lehnberg and Jasper have little need for ownership rights, and the fact that Antioch has not responded since you asked him about his future contribution plans, is a pretty big indicator he's also not going to be around (in addition to not being active in nearly 2 months, of course).
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Missing:
Otherwise the rest is updated and accurate as of 25/05/21.
Rendered text