[06:13:30] 10GitLab (Account Approval), 06Release-Engineering-Team: Requesting GitLab account activation for [দিব্য দত্ত] - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T368847#9938178 (10Dibya) 05Stalled→03Open [11:19:56] 10GitLab (Infrastructure), 06collaboration-services, 13Patch-For-Review: GitLab sre.gitlab.upgrade cookbook should lock all other backups during runtime - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T367501#9939279 (10Jelto) a:03Jelto [12:05:15] 10GitLab (Account Approval), 06Release-Engineering-Team: Requesting GitLab account activation for [YOUR DEVELOPER ACCOUNT USERNAME HERE] - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T368906 (10Davenyi) 03NEW [12:06:47] 10GitLab (Account Approval), 06Release-Engineering-Team: Requesting GitLab account activation for [Davenyi] - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T368907 (10Davenyi) 03NEW [12:08:04] 10GitLab (Account Approval), 06Release-Engineering-Team: Requesting GitLab account activation for [Davenyi] - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T368907#9939467 (10Davenyi) Please approve my account [12:13:03] 10GitLab (Account Approval), 06Release-Engineering-Team: Requesting GitLab account activation for [YOUR DEVELOPER ACCOUNT USERNAME HERE] - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T368906#9939491 (10jcrespo) →14Duplicate dup:03T368907 [12:13:41] 10GitLab (Account Approval), 06Release-Engineering-Team: Requesting GitLab account activation for [Davenyi] - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T368907#9939489 (10jcrespo) [12:14:32] 10GitLab (Account Approval), 06Release-Engineering-Team: Requesting GitLab account activation for [Davenyi] - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T368907#9939494 (10jcrespo) @Davenyi please note you missed the options asked on the form, as seen above. [12:35:14] 10GitLab (Account Approval), 06Release-Engineering-Team: Requesting GitLab account activation for [Davenyi] - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T368907#9939532 (10Aklapper) 05Open→03Stalled a:03Davenyi > Please approve my account Please fill in all data first instead of leaving this ticket empty [13:27:44] 10GitLab (Infrastructure), 06collaboration-services, 06Release-Engineering-Team, 13Patch-For-Review: Upgrade GitLab to major version 17 - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T365675#9939667 (10Jelto) 05Open→03Resolved I'll close the task as the major version upgrade is finished. If any new errors are... [15:28:30] 10GitLab (Project Migration), 10VideoCutTool: Migrate VideoCutTool to Gitlab and archive Gerrit repo - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T347807#9940307 (10Ottomata) [18:12:33] 10GitLab (Account Approval), 06Release-Engineering-Team: Requesting GitLab account activation for @audreypenven - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T367972#9941454 (10brennen) 05Open→03Resolved [18:17:31] 10GitLab (Account Approval), 06Release-Engineering-Team: Requesting GitLab account activation for Balajijagadesh - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T368843#9941466 (10brennen) 05Open→03Resolved [20:16:39] 10GitLab (Account Approval), 06Release-Engineering-Team: Requesting GitLab account activation for rockingpenny4 - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T368854#9942144 (10brennen) 05Open→03Resolved [20:18:14] 10GitLab (Account Approval), 06Release-Engineering-Team: Requesting GitLab account activation for rockingpenny4 - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T368854#9942146 (10brennen) [20:24:59] bd808: i feel like we're trending a little gatekeep-y with the gitlab account activation thing. trying to edit the form into something a little more streamlined - given the actual workflow these days, should it instead be a "please add me to trusted-contributors" form? [20:28:13] #trusted-contributors should still require vouching though. Just sayin as it does give you some more permissions in Phab [20:34:18] yeah, that's fair. i just feeling weird grilling people who've clearly been around for a bit what they plan to work on before they can have a gitlab account. i don't really want to imply that the bar for access there is _higher_ than being active on phabricator. [20:39:35] brennen: I agree that there is some gatekeeping uncomfort. I like the idea of trying to lean into #trusted-contributors as the real hat being given out. As andre points out that has some consequences to think about too.l [20:40:28] yeah, fair. for the moment i'm just doing a bit of tweaking of the language, but that seems like a good direction to push. (with some thinking about those consequences.) [20:41:00] I _think_ we are mostly trying to screen for "not a complete jerk who will attack the infrastructure" in both phab and gitlab. [20:42:04] One heuristic we use for both is "has had a SUL account for N days/weeks and not been blcoked on wiki for being a jerk" [20:42:29] 10GitLab (Account Approval), 06Release-Engineering-Team: Requesting GitLab account activation for [Davenyi] - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T368907#9942217 (10brennen) 05Stalled→03Resolved [20:44:47] *One heuristic we /could/ use [20:45:14] 10GitLab (Account Approval), 06Release-Engineering-Team: Requesting GitLab account activation for [Davenyi] - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T368907#9942235 (10brennen) User has a (not extensive, but no reason to expect malicious activity) history of on-wiki activity, so I'm going ahead and approving th... [20:46:31] that does kind of line up with the manual evaluation one does around these things. [20:48:05] at least with gitlab, we got here by saying "we need to stop this flood of spammers"; i'd just rather not erect an entire bureaucracy by accident in doing that. [20:48:51] (which i want to acknowledge as a concern that bd808 and others raised at the time, so, like, hoping to mitigate that tendency now.) [20:50:19] (anyhow, my workday draws to a close. catch y'all tomorrow.) [20:51:37] The "wiki way" is to let folks have the rights they need to help move the projects forward. The tricky bit when you are outside of MediaWiki proper where WP:BOLD and being able to undo pretty much everything "easily" is deciding how much pain to take on for the times when the presumption of constructive participation fails. [20:53:18] * bd808 apparently thought he put words in that run-on sentence that he did not. [20:53:35] the gist comes across. [20:53:37] and yeah. [20:55:23] We do have proper Developer account locking when we discover a jerk, but we don't have a wide group that has the hat that lets that locking happen at the moment. [20:55:55] we don't have the eyeballs that the (big) wikis do, and some of the available kinds of vandalism in the developer tooling are gnarly to deal with. [20:56:14] I don't have any good intuition at all of how much toil there is in GitLab attack cleanup yet either [20:56:38] i just don't want to turn the dial _too_ far away from wiki-like access. [20:57:01] the wave of spam that prompted us to limit access in the first place was pretty un-fun to deal with. [20:57:27] (and could have been a lot less fun if it were more focused in its malice.) [20:58:47] yup yup. I think we are broadly in agreement then. We don't like judging folks and would like to have easier to apply rules for those times when we feel that we have to. And probably we should start investing in better tools for rolling back jerkiness because honestly it will happen no matter what [20:59:25] ::nod::