Mailing list management - Owner Permissions

How does one assign “Service Administrators” to a main list via PCC? Seems like this should be something obvious that I’m just missing. :grimacing:

1 Like

Hi @Kenny_Paul, sorry for my delayed reresponse here. Have you figured it out?

There should be an ‘+Add Service Administrator’ button for in mailing lists. You can find more detailed instructions here:
Mailing List - Linux Foundation Documentation

Hi @Kenny_Paul, the short answer is you cannot via PCC.

“Service Administrator” was a 1:1 map to “owner” permissions on the “main” group in The trajectory with PCC is that activities which would historically be done with “owner” permissions on (creating & configuring lists) are, or will be, done through PCC. Our last big refresh of the mailing list interface added the ability to manage list/subgroup members and to assign moderator permissions, an important capability to bridge the gap back to interface, where moderation activities still need to happen.

Note, you can assign somebody “moderator” rights on the “main” list in PCC, which will grant them global moderator permissions across all lists. (This is the closest we have to the old service admin concept.)

Please also note that existing “owners” on the main group or subgroups will also show the “moderator” checkbox flagged in PCC. They will keep their existing/legacy owner permissions (unless you were to uncheck and save and then you wouldn’t have a way in PCC to re-grant that access).

Configuring for non-email-list features like wiki, calendar, etc is not something we have on the roadmap to support in PCC. Existing/legacy owners can use the UI to make these (unsupported) changes as well as confer owner perms on additional individuals. (For a brand new service/domain, you would need to submit a service desk request.) Also, please keep us informed where we are missing PCC features for owner-permission-required configuration changes that are mailing list related that you need, as we would want to accommodate those in PCC.

p.s. @Henry_Quaye those docs are out of date


Thank you @emsearcy , @sharan_kumar can you update the docs here to reflect Eric’s response?

So in this continuity use case:

  • BobbySue is the the only living/breathing “owner” of a Gio main list for her community
  • The Community does make use of features that aren’t supported by PCC
  • BobbySue wins the lottery, buys an island and never thinks about any of us ever again
  • We all spend a few days being wildly jealous before eventually getting back to our work
  • BillyBob gets handed the community responsibilities which were abandoned by the now blissfully rich and completely unresponsive former list owner

Does someone tagging BillyBob as a Moderator of main via PCC get him all the Gio permissions he needs to do whatever administration is required for features not directly supported by PCC? If not, what is the correct path for a successful reassignment?

(Note: we just went through a much less dramatic version of this scenario and I used ITX to do it, thus the original reason for starting the thread)

Thanks @Henry_Quaye , I update the docs accordingly.

  1. You first would use PCC to unset BobbySue as “moderator” from all lists they are moderator/owner on (this will remove the owner access they no longer need) - if they created lists/subgroups they may be owner on these as well. Or, if they are no longer involved in the community, removing them from the main list/group will remove them, including their owner access, from all other lists/subgroups.
  2. Tagging BillyBob as moderator in PCC would give them the ability to manage all currently-enabled, non-PCC-supported features! That is because all other features (calendar, wiki, etc) configure escalated permissions for moderators, not owners (see screenshot of G.o calendar permissions, for instance). However, BillyBob would NOT be able to enable/disable features (such as on new lists/subgroups), so, assuming BillyBob does need to be escalated to an owner, the “correct path for successful reassignment” (in lieu of using our legacy internal ITX Console) would be for the PMO or other authorized project contact to create a support ticket to request this.
    Screen Shot 2022-03-08 at 9.11.56 AM

Got it! Thanks for the clarification. :grin: