Hello all, Recently with the new haskell.org server move, a few of us have taken roles of administrating the new server infrastructure including ghc.haskell.org, containing the GHC repositories. (Previously, the GHC repos were on abbot.haskell.org, which was maintained by Galois. The new servers are community managed.) I'm one of these people, so first off if you have any problems, let me know! I should also say Herbert Valerio Riedel has also stepped up to help administrate the GHC Trac instance. He's quite experienced in these sorts of matters, and his help is greatly appreciated. If there's anything wrong in this area, he can also be of help. :) Anyway, the real topic: Recently, we have been discussing the way GHC's repositories are managed, and it's slightly suboptimal for several reasons. We would instead like to deploy Gitolite, a smart git-access wrapper. This will not only solve some annoying issues (like Simon's recent permissions error when pushing to testsuite,) but also make ghc.haskell.org more secure and easier to maintain. We have a proposal with preliminary details up here: http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/GitolitePlan Please refer to it for the exact details. But the visible overview for all the active developers will be: * Shell accounts will go away. You'll only have access to the repositories. * Your SSH push URL will change very slightly. * sync-all will probably need to change a bit for the new remotes. This will all need to happen within a small window of downtime. As outlined above, we believe we can pull off a switch with minimal interruption. So on that end, we need to know a few things too. What we'd like to know is: * Does any developer who has shell access to ghc.haskell.org actually *need it*? Outside of administrative tasks, I'm not sure who should and should not have access. At the least, your privileges will be slightly reduced after we're done (since the darcs group won't be needed.) * Who is an active committer? I'm not really sure what to do here, but we can easily transplant all the current users in the 'darcs' group. Alternatively we can establish it for most of the core committers, and add people who commit less frequently on a rolling basis (they can just contact me.) * When should this be done? The downtime window will be small hopefully, and I don't think this would really inconvenience anyone too much if we did it soon, but I feel we should ask. -- Regards, Austin - PGP: 4096R/0x91384671