-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.3k
provide path to meeting note access #8689
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
|
|
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: NickLiszewski The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
|
Welcome @NickLiszewski! |
|
Hi @NickLiszewski. Thanks for your PR. I'm waiting for a github.com member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the I understand the commands that are listed here. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. |
|
/retest |
|
@NickLiszewski: Cannot trigger testing until a trusted user reviews the PR and leaves an In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. |
I was able to view the meeting notes with the Google account that joined the Google group (mailing list), but not anonymously or from other Google accounts.
Perhaps the best path is instead to make view access public to anyone, and write access only for group members?
FYI: Currently anyone who joins the mailing list gets immediate edit access to this doc. I noticed the Architecture SIG uses "suggesting mode" for broader contributors, which might be a good model for us to consider.