Websites and Apps would like a new team workflow category for potential contributors to request access to the Fedora Websites and Apps GitLab repository.
Something along the following lines might work for the category description.
Welcome and thanks for contributing to Fedora Websites and Apps! Just click the “New Topic” button below to create a new conversation thread with your request to be granted write access to the Fedora Websites and Apps GitLab repository and an admin will respond to let you know when they have added your account to the group.
Also, the New Topic template should probably be something along the following lines (correct me if I’m wrong).
By clicking the `Create Topic` button below, you agree to the following terms.
- [x] I agree to the terms of the [Fedora Project Contributor Agreement](https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/legal/fpca/).
- [x] I will adhere to the [Fedora Community Code of Conduct](https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/).
By clicking the `Create Topic` button below, you agree to the following terms.
- [x] I agree to the terms of the [Fedora Project Contributor Agreement](https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/legal/fpca/).
- [x] I will adhere to the [Fedora Community Code of Conduct](https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/)
We’ve previously avoided requiring a CoC checkbox, because the Code of Conduct also applies in Fedora spaces where a checkbox doesn’t (or can’t) exist. We don’t want people to get the impression that they can somehow decline to agree and yet participate in the community. I’d suggest instead adding a reminder to the category description.
For the FPCA, we could do something different — there is a (hidden) group @signed_fpca, which consists of everyone who has checked that box. So, we could set the category permissions so that membership in that group is required to post, and set “Banner text when a user cannot create a topic in this category” to explain that this is necessary.
One question I have is will all this work before the user has a FAS account? The link we expect people will be following to get here will be coming from GitLab. So it is entirely possible that they won’t even have a FAS account yet. (In which case, the extra verbiage in the category description to explain the problem might be even more prescient.)
Do they have to log in to see the category description? If not, then I guess that should be fine. I remember a comment about users not being able to see the Fedora Magazine workflow if not signed in. But I think it may have just been that they could not browse to it from the top level. I’m guessing a direct link from GitLab would show the description text. And then clicking the “New Topic” button would open accounts.fedoraproject.org?
If you think the workflow would be better if we stay in GitLab, that is an option. The main problem there is that they often neglect to inform us of their FAS account name when they file their initial GitLab issue requesting access and then there can be a bit of back and forth to get the account name if I cannot easily find it via zodbot. We are trying to come up with a smoother workflow and we thought that since FAS accounts are one-to-one with the name they use here, it might work better here.
Any and all advice/suggestions are welcome (and there is no rush).
I have all of the Workflow categories muted by default, so they’re not on the front page and people won’t get notifications, but you can browse to them — or follow links. For example, open
