Add rvagg and jennijuju as members to "github-mgmt stewards"

[BigLep]

Summary

Add rvagg as a member to "githut-mgmt stewards"

Also started documented why the current set of members are there.

Why do you need this?

This is being done now because there have been various permissions/access issues of late as part of cleaning up repos that FilOz owns/maintainers (e.g., improving CI, updating dependencies, adding dependabot). This empowers FilOz to start attemping some better practice of doing these kind of permissions changes under PR and in a more transparent way.

What else do we need to know?

This set of members will also get reviewed and improved as part of #47

Reviewer's Checklist

• It is clear where the request is coming from (if unsure, ask)
• All the automated checks passed
• The YAML changes reflect the summary of the request
• The Terraform plan posted as a comment reflects the summary of the request

[github-actions]

The following access changes will be introduced as a result of applying the plan:

Access Changes

User rvagg:
  - will gain push permission to github-mgmt

[github-actions]

Before merge, verify that all the following plans are correct. They will be applied as-is after the merge.

Terraform plans

filecoin-project

Terraform used the selected providers to generate the following execution
plan. Resource actions are indicated with the following symbols:
  + create
  ~ update in-place

Terraform will perform the following actions:

  # github_repository.this["github-mgmt"] will be updated in-place
  ~ resource "github_repository" "this" {
        id                          = "github-mgmt"
        name                        = "github-mgmt"
        # (32 unchanged attributes hidden)

      ~ security_and_analysis {

          ~ secret_scanning {
              ~ status = "disabled" -> "enabled"
            }

          ~ secret_scanning_push_protection {
              ~ status = "disabled" -> "enabled"
            }
        }

        # (1 unchanged block hidden)
    }

  # github_team_membership.this["github-mgmt stewards:jennijuju"] will be created
  + resource "github_team_membership" "this" {
      + etag     = (known after apply)
      + id       = (known after apply)
      + role     = "maintainer"
      + team_id  = "7326115"
      + username = "jennijuju"
    }

  # github_team_membership.this["github-mgmt stewards:rvagg"] will be created
  + resource "github_team_membership" "this" {
      + etag     = (known after apply)
      + id       = (known after apply)
      + role     = "member"
      + team_id  = "7326115"
      + username = "rvagg"
    }

Plan: 2 to add, 1 to change, 0 to destroy.

[galargh]

FYI, org admins have to be set as team.maintainers if I remember correctly. That's because GitHub auto-bumps their team privileges anyway.

[BigLep]

FYI, org admins have to be set as team.maintainers if I remember correctly. That's because GitHub auto-bumps their team privileges anyway.

@galargh : so, for example, are you saying I need to switch you back to being a github-mgmt Steward maintainer instead of member?

[galargh]

Yes, exactly! It's not a big issue if we merge it as-is. It's only that the next time we run the sync, it's going to revert me back to a maintainer role automatically.

[BigLep]

Yes, exactly! It's not a big issue if we merge it as-is. It's only that the next time we run the sync, it's going to revert me back to a maintainer role automatically.

Great. I think I handled this in 5b2dfc3 . Feel free to merge if you don't see any problems. Thanks!

[BigLep]

FYI @rvagg that I am adding you to github-mgmt stewards.

[BigLep]

I'm going to go ahead and merge this because:

1. @galargh did have a look and didn't request changes
2. we can revert/edit this if there are concerns or followup feedback
   Doh - I forgot we need one approval. I'll see if @jennijuju can give it.

[jennijuju]

Hrm I guess I’m fine with this but also hoping there are more people that is stewarding this so im not blocking any urgent requests. TLDR maybe onboard and get two or more people from the project owner group to this workflow

[BigLep]

Yes, that is the plan. We'll get some others when holistically attacking org ownership in #47 . (This group needs to be looked at in light of who is also an org owner/admin as this group can self-service elevant themselves and the org admin/owners can self-service make changes here as well.).