Hi all,
Ryan Lane just showed me that in Gerrit there is a separate right for creating repositories. I suggest we give this right to all WMF engineers. A repo is free and fun and will prevent unnecessary delays.
Best, Diederik
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 10:33 AM, Diederik van Liere dvanliere@gmail.com wrote:
Ryan Lane just showed me that in Gerrit there is a separate right for creating repositories. I suggest we give this right to all WMF engineers. A repo is free and fun and will prevent unnecessary delays.
For the record this is a reference to
https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/admin/groups/119,info
-Jeremy
I don't want to give this right to all engineers because setting up new repositories is more than just choosing the name. There's also the issue of understanding how Gerrit permissions work so you can set them up properly. I did make a new "Project Creators" group that I'm more than willing to add people to, once they've learned Gerrit permissions.
In addition, unless you make a group you're in the owner of the repo (which can't be done via the GUI, only the CLI--this is a bug), you won't be able to set permissions at all (this is by design).
So yeah, its not as easy as it sounds on the tin, so I don't want to hand this out en masse. In an ideal world, I want us to have a special page where people can request repos and we can automate the icky backend stuff.
-Chad On Jun 1, 2012 10:33 AM, "Diederik van Liere" dvanliere@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
Ryan Lane just showed me that in Gerrit there is a separate right for creating repositories. I suggest we give this right to all WMF engineers. A repo is free and fun and will prevent unnecessary delays.
Best, Diederik
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Could you please add David Schoonover and Andrew Otto to the Project Creators group? Best, Diederik
On 2012-06-01, at 5:41 PM, Chad wrote:
I don't want to give this right to all engineers because setting up new repositories is more than just choosing the name. There's also the issue of understanding how Gerrit permissions work so you can set them up properly. I did make a new "Project Creators" group that I'm more than willing to add people to, once they've learned Gerrit permissions.
In addition, unless you make a group you're in the owner of the repo (which can't be done via the GUI, only the CLI--this is a bug), you won't be able to set permissions at all (this is by design).
So yeah, its not as easy as it sounds on the tin, so I don't want to hand this out en masse. In an ideal world, I want us to have a special page where people can request repos and we can automate the icky backend stuff.
-Chad On Jun 1, 2012 10:33 AM, "Diederik van Liere" dvanliere@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
Ryan Lane just showed me that in Gerrit there is a separate right for creating repositories. I suggest we give this right to all WMF engineers. A repo is free and fun and will prevent unnecessary delays.
Best, Diederik
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Chad innocentkiller@gmail.com wrote:
So yeah, its not as easy as it sounds on the tin, so I don't want to hand this out en masse. In an ideal world, I want us to have a special page where people can request repos and we can automate the icky backend stuff.
If it isn't easy, let's make it easy. I'm a new developer and not having a repository to develop in has been absolutely paralyzing. (I requested one on May 23, for what it's worth).
Gerrit is not just an SCM: there is a rapidly growing ecosystem of services that integrate with it -- and if your code isn't there, you're persona non grata. I've whipped up two iterations of a data collection backend for my team and got it set up on a labs instance, but that was a week ago, and since then things are at a standstill. It's been hard to get anyone to look at it, because everyone's workflow and attentional habits are interwoven with Gerrit now.
This particular side-project is a useful illustration of another important point: Git's usefulness isn't limited to managing mature projects like Mediawiki -- it has a crucial role to play in the earliest stages of development, too. I have no idea if what I wrote is usable and scalable, and it would've been good to get some feedback early. In the past, I have found it useful and productive to whip up quick prototypes and put them up on GitHub for feedback, instead of trading in inchoate ideas, or sitting on them until the ideas feel mature (which *never* happens for me until I sit down and start writing code). The ideas that stick get developed into full-fledged products. Using Git in this way has been such a tremendous boon for me as a developer, and not having that has been really frustrating.
I don't think expanding git-creation rights to a few more individuals goes far enough, because the point at which you need a repository is antecedent to the point in time at which you feel comfortable describing your work to someone. For cool projects to happen, people need to feel empowered to start repos for projects that seem speculative and maybe even a little silly, and that won't happen when you make it necessary to ask for permission.
At this point I expect someone to come along and point out that you don't need Gerrit to start a Git repository -- "git init" will suffice. And that's true, as long as you don't need to collaborate with anyone, or develop on more than one machine (say rsync & I'll bop you on the head!), or have stable urls to share with people.
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 1:50 AM, Ori Livneh ori.livneh@gmail.com wrote:
If it isn't easy, let's make it easy. I'm a new developer and not having a repository to develop in has been absolutely paralyzing. (I requested one on May 23, for what it's worth).
Gerrit is not just an SCM: there is a rapidly growing ecosystem of services that integrate with it -- and if your code isn't there, you're persona non grata. I've whipped up two iterations of a data collection backend for my team and got it set up on a labs instance, but that was a week ago, and since then things are at a standstill. It's been hard to get anyone to look at it, because everyone's workflow and attentional habits are interwoven with Gerrit now.
This particular side-project is a useful illustration of another important point: Git's usefulness isn't limited to managing mature projects like Mediawiki -- it has a crucial role to play in the earliest stages of development, too. I have no idea if what I wrote is usable and scalable, and it would've been good to get some feedback early. In the past, I have found it useful and productive to whip up quick prototypes and put them up on GitHub for feedback, instead of trading in inchoate ideas, or sitting on them until the ideas feel mature (which *never* happens for me until I sit down and start writing code). The ideas that stick get developed into full-fledged products. Using Git in this way has been such a tremendous boon for me as a developer, and not having that has been really frustrating.
I don't think expanding git-creation rights to a few more individuals goes far enough, because the point at which you need a repository is antecedent to the point in time at which you feel comfortable describing your work to someone. For cool projects to happen, people need to feel empowered to start repos for projects that seem speculative and maybe even a little silly, and that won't happen when you make it necessary to ask for permission.
At this point I expect someone to come along and point out that you don't need Gerrit to start a Git repository -- "git init" will suffice. And that's true, as long as you don't need to collaborate with anyone, or develop on more than one machine (say rsync & I'll bop you on the head!), or have stable urls to share with people.
I mostly agree with what you've said.
Just wanted to point out gerrit projects (aka repos) can never be destroyed. so if you e.g. typo or rename a project or kill it 5 days after you started it's still there forever. Only very recently have we even been able to hide projects from project listings in the UI.
-Jeremy
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 11:00 PM, Jeremy Baron jeremy@tuxmachine.com wrote:
I mostly agree with what you've said.
Just wanted to point out gerrit projects (aka repos) can never be destroyed. so if you e.g. typo or rename a project or kill it 5 days after you started it's still there forever. Only very recently have we even been able to hide projects from project listings in the UI.
Isn't the same basically true of Wiki articles? I understand the desire to keep things tidy, okay. But what would be the big deal about having ten or even a hundred thousand abandoned repositories, so long as they are hidden, and do not clutter the UI? The repositories that would be candidates for deletion are the ones that got no further than an initial stab, and those measure in kilobytes.
Hi Ori,
I absolutely 100% agree and we really need to sort this out this week. The lost productivity is unacceptable.
So far I have heard different arguments why we cannot hand out 'create-repo rights' to engineers:
The first reason was that only admin's could do it but that is not longer true with the special create repo right group
The second reason was that Gerrit's permission system is either too complex or engineers don't know how it works. I have full confidence in our engineers that they can master Gerrit's permission system in less than a day.
Now a new argument is unleashed and that is that we cannot delete repos. The fact that we cannot delete repos is a non-argument. None of us are going to create a bazillion repos.
The way we are using Git right now makes it a more centralized system than Subversion ever was. This means that we are not using it right. So I really hope that we can close this discussion by handing out the 'create-repo right' to paid WMF engineers or any paid WMF engineer who requests this.
Diederik
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 8:13 AM, Ori Livneh ori.livneh@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 11:00 PM, Jeremy Baron jeremy@tuxmachine.com wrote:
I mostly agree with what you've said.
Just wanted to point out gerrit projects (aka repos) can never be destroyed. so if you e.g. typo or rename a project or kill it 5 days after you started it's still there forever. Only very recently have we even been able to hide projects from project listings in the UI.
Isn't the same basically true of Wiki articles? I understand the desire to keep things tidy, okay. But what would be the big deal about having ten or even a hundred thousand abandoned repositories, so long as they are hidden, and do not clutter the UI? The repositories that would be candidates for deletion are the ones that got no further than an initial stab, and those measure in kilobytes. _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Hi Diederik, Ori,
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 11:25 PM, Diederik van Liere dvanliere@gmail.comwrote:
Hi Ori,
I absolutely 100% agree and we really need to sort this out this week. The lost productivity is unacceptable.
It is unacceptable to have developers waiting in queue to get create-repo
access 'some day'. We've lost at least a couple of weeks worth of productivity in Ori's case (for E3) since he's been unable to firstly get gerrit access and then wait for someone from the release engineering team to be available to create repos for him.
So far I have heard different arguments why we cannot hand out 'create-repo rights' to engineers:
The first reason was that only admin's could do it but that is not longer true with the special create repo right group
This reason should not hold anymore.
The second reason was that Gerrit's permission system is either too complex or engineers don't know how it works. I have full confidence in our engineers that they can master Gerrit's permission system in less than a day.
Well - that points to another problem - that of not providing adequate training on Git/Gerrit even to foundation engineers. I understand that every migration takes time but without having a published plan to support and train application developers - this process of learning bit by bit will take forever. And just think of the tough learning curve our volunteer contributors may be having to go through.
Now a new argument is unleashed and that is that we cannot delete repos. The fact that we cannot delete repos is a non-argument. None of us are going to create a bazillion repos.
Agreed.
The way we are using Git right now makes it a more centralized system than Subversion ever was. This means that we are not using it right. So I really hope that we can close this discussion by handing out the 'create-repo right' to paid WMF engineers or any paid WMF engineer who requests this.
One of the major objectives stated for migrating to Git was to increase developer contributions and make is easier every one to contribute. Right now we seem to be stuck in the world of recreating our old world of svn into Git. We can do better.
Alolita
Diederik
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 8:13 AM, Ori Livneh ori.livneh@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 11:00 PM, Jeremy Baron jeremy@tuxmachine.com wrote:
I mostly agree with what you've said.
Just wanted to point out gerrit projects (aka repos) can never be destroyed. so if you e.g. typo or rename a project or kill it 5 days after you started it's still there forever. Only very recently have we even been able to hide projects from project listings in the UI.
Isn't the same basically true of Wiki articles? I understand the desire
to
keep things tidy, okay. But what would be the big deal about having ten
or
even a hundred thousand abandoned repositories, so long as they are
hidden,
and do not clutter the UI? The repositories that would be candidates for deletion are the ones that got no further than an initial stab, and those measure in kilobytes. _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Alolita Sharma alolita.sharma@gmail.com wrote:
It is unacceptable to have developers waiting in queue to get create-repo access 'some day'. We've lost at least a couple of weeks worth of productivity in Ori's case (for E3) since he's been unable to firstly get gerrit access and then wait for someone from the release engineering team to be available to create repos for him.
Did anyway say, Ask about it? I'm sure if you followed up with the one of the project creators (eg: chad) he would have been more than happy to push things along.
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 5:40 AM, K. Peachey p858snake@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Alolita Sharma alolita.sharma@gmail.com wrote:
It is unacceptable to have developers waiting in queue to get create-repo access 'some day'. We've lost at least a couple of weeks worth of productivity in Ori's case (for E3) since he's been unable to firstly get gerrit access and then wait for someone from the release engineering team to be available to create repos for him.
Did anyway say, Ask about it? I'm sure if you followed up with the one of the project creators (eg: chad) he would have been more than happy to push things along.
Just as a quick note--I created the E3 repo yesterday.
-Chad
Did anyway say, Ask about it? I'm sure if you followed up with the one of the project creators (eg: chad) he would have been more than happy to push things along.
I am sorry but I disagree. The question is not whether Chad or one of the Gerrit admin's will help us, because they are super responsive and are always helping us out when there are issues. The question is: what do we (WMF engineers) think is a sensible Git / Gerrit workflow. Creating repo's is part of this workflow. I believe in decentralized teams and our software should support this.
A workflow where engineers have to bug a Gerrit admin to do something is a broken workflow: * You will always bug an admin at the wrong time * It always takes more time to bug somebody than DIY, we are really losing productive hours on issues like this. * We are professional engineers, and every engineer should know how to create a repo in Gerrit. * Bugging an engineer (in general) is not a scalable workflow and we should really move away from these kind of of accepted practises.
We need to stop focusing on what Gerrit can / cannot do and we need to start drafting out team-specific workflows on how we want to use Git / Gerrit.
Diederik
On 2012-06-06 00:19, Diederik van Liere wrote:
A workflow where engineers have to bug a Gerrit admin to do something is a broken workflow:
As something of an outsider/newcomer, I hear two very different stories. The first is the story of all the good reasons why Linus Torvalds created git, how it is fully decentralized and asynchronous, and how bad it was to work with SVN. The other story is gerrit, and how everything must now go through this bottleneck of new centralization. There's a conflict here, that needs to be sorted out. Does Linus Torvalds really use gerrit?
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 12:09 PM, Lars Aronsson lars@aronsson.se wrote:
As something of an outsider/newcomer, I hear two very different stories. The first is the story of all the good reasons why Linus Torvalds created git, how it is fully decentralized and asynchronous, and how bad it was to work with SVN. The other story is gerrit, and how everything must now go through this bottleneck of new centralization. There's a conflict here, that needs to be sorted out. Does Linus Torvalds really use gerrit?
WWLTD? :)
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 4:09 AM, Lars Aronsson lars@aronsson.se wrote:
On 2012-06-06 00:19, Diederik van Liere wrote:
A workflow where engineers have to bug a Gerrit admin to do something is a broken workflow:
As something of an outsider/newcomer, I hear two very different stories. The first is the story of all the good reasons why Linus Torvalds created git, how it is fully decentralized and asynchronous, and how bad it was to work with SVN. The other story is gerrit, and how everything must now go through this bottleneck of new centralization. There's a conflict here, that needs to be sorted out. Does Linus Torvalds really use gerrit?
Well, the Wikipedia page says that Gerrit is developed by one of the co-authors of git, so that must say something, right?
- Ryan
Lars Aronsson lars@aronsson.se wrote:
On 2012-06-06 00:19, Diederik van Liere wrote:
A workflow where engineers have to bug a Gerrit admin to do something is a broken workflow:
As something of an outsider/newcomer, I hear two very different stories. The first is the story of all the good reasons why Linus Torvalds created git, how it is fully decentralized and asynchronous, and how bad it was to work with SVN. The other story is gerrit, and how everything must now go through this bottleneck of new centralization. There's a conflict here, that needs to be sorted out. Does Linus Torvalds really use gerrit?
No, he does not. He uses email workflow to manage patches.
Gerrit tries to do something contrary a bit to the original git philosophy - it tries to manage commits (trees of files) as patches (changes to the code), it also encourages that developers work one-perfect-commit at a time instead of a "feature branch".
I am not saying it's a bad or impossible workflow but it seems to be a bitter dissapointment for people coming from different background (say, github-like pull-requests).
I would say gerrit puts a cap on a typical git workflow. Hey, it's even difficult to review and approve changes off-line.
//Saper
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 2:40 AM, K. Peachey p858snake@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Alolita Sharma alolita.sharma@gmail.com wrote:
It is unacceptable to have developers waiting in queue to get create-repo access 'some day'. We've lost at least a couple of weeks worth of productivity in Ori's case (for E3) since he's been unable to firstly get gerrit access and then wait for someone from the release engineering team to be available to create repos for him.
Did anyway say, Ask about it? I'm sure if you followed up with the one of the project creators (eg: chad) he would have been more than happy to push things along.
We already had.
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 2:25 AM, Diederik van Liere dvanliere@gmail.com wrote:
Now a new argument is unleashed and that is that we cannot delete repos. The fact that we cannot delete repos is a non-argument. None of us are going to create a bazillion repos.
I was just pointing it out; I've no idea how gerrit behaves with lots of small+hidden repos. or with most of the repos in an instance hidden. Maybe it's not a problem.
It sounds like Ori (and I think this is true for other people too) would create lots of repos that don't live too long. Maybe that's a bazillion, maybe not.
-Jeremy
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 8:44 AM, Jeremy Baron jeremy@tuxmachine.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 2:25 AM, Diederik van Liere dvanliere@gmail.com wrote:
Now a new argument is unleashed and that is that we cannot delete repos. The fact that we cannot delete repos is a non-argument. None of us are going to create a bazillion repos.
I was just pointing it out; I've no idea how gerrit behaves with lots of small+hidden repos. or with most of the repos in an instance hidden. Maybe it's not a problem.
I would suggest that we cross that bridge when we get there. AFAIK,Ori and the E3 team would only need a handful of repos in the coming months and the same applies to the Analytics team.
It sounds like Ori (and I think this is true for other people too) would create lots of repos that don't live too long. Maybe that's a bazillion, maybe not.
-Jeremy
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 2:50 AM, Diederik van Liere dvanliere@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 8:44 AM, Jeremy Baron jeremy@tuxmachine.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 2:25 AM, Diederik van Liere dvanliere@gmail.com wrote:
Now a new argument is unleashed and that is that we cannot delete repos. The fact that we cannot delete repos is a non-argument. None of us are going to create a bazillion repos.
I was just pointing it out; I've no idea how gerrit behaves with lots of small+hidden repos. or with most of the repos in an instance hidden. Maybe it's not a problem.
I would suggest that we cross that bridge when we get there. AFAIK,Ori and the E3 team would only need a handful of repos in the coming months and the same applies to the Analytics team.
I should have clarified: I don't think repo creation rights should wait on figuring it out.
We need cheap and copious repos regardless of who can technically create them. Even if there's only 10 or 30 people that can create repos we still could easily end up with a bazillion.
-Jeremy
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 11:44 PM, Jeremy Baron jeremy@tuxmachine.com wrote:
I was just pointing it out; I've no idea how gerrit behaves with lots of small+hidden repos. or with most of the repos in an instance hidden. Maybe it's not a problem.
Some numbers here: < http://gerrit-documentation.googlecode.com/svn/Documentation/2.4/dev-design....
So the estimated maximum number of projects is 10.000, while the default maximum is 1.000. For contributors, the default maximum is 1.000 and the estimated maximum number is 50.000
Can we please tag this concern as addressed and start handing out the rights? Diederik
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Ori Livneh ori.livneh@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 11:44 PM, Jeremy Baron jeremy@tuxmachine.com wrote:
I was just pointing it out; I've no idea how gerrit behaves with lots of small+hidden repos. or with most of the repos in an instance hidden. Maybe it's not a problem.
Some numbers here: <
http://gerrit-documentation.googlecode.com/svn/Documentation/2.4/dev-design....
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 6:33 AM, Diederik van Liere dvanliere@gmail.com wrote:
So the estimated maximum number of projects is 10.000, while the default maximum is 1.000. For contributors, the default maximum is 1.000 and the estimated maximum number is 50.000
Can we please tag this concern as addressed and start handing out the rights? Diederik
I've whipped up a quick tutorial for people who want to create new repositories[0]. If people can read and make sure they understand this page (with its various caveats), then yes, we can start handing this out.
-Chad
[0] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Git/Creating_new_repositories
Le 05/06/12 14:13, Chad a écrit :
I've whipped up a quick tutorial for people who want to create new repositories[0]. If people can read and make sure they understand this page (with its various caveats), then yes, we can start handing this out.
-Chad
[0] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Git/Creating_new_repositories
Hello Chad,
Thanks for the tutorial, that is definitely going to help spread the repo creation rights. I am more than happy to --sign-off your text :)
cheers,
I've whipped up a quick tutorial for people who want to create new repositories[0]. If people can read and make sure they understand this page (with its various caveats), then yes, we can start handing this out.
-Chad
[0] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Git/Creating_new_repositories
Dear Chad, This is really helpful! Thanks so much for putting this together! Diederik
Hey Chad,
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Diederik van Liere dvanliere@gmail.comwrote:
I've whipped up a quick tutorial for people who want to create new repositories[0]. If people can read and make sure they understand this page (with its various caveats), then yes, we can start handing this out.
-Chad
[0] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Git/Creating_new_repositories
Many thanks for this and your help on creating the E3 repo. Appreciate it!
Best, Alolita
Dear Chad, This is really helpful! Thanks so much for putting this together! Diederik
________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
On 01/06/12 17:41, Chad wrote:
I did make a new "Project Creators" group that I'm more than willing to add people to, once they've learned Gerrit permissions.
In addition, unless you make a group you're in the owner of the repo (which can't be done via the GUI, only the CLI--this is a bug), you won't be able to set permissions at all (this is by design).
Are current permission groups viewable anywhere?
Platonides schrieb:
On 01/06/12 17:41, Chad wrote:
I did make a new "Project Creators" group that I'm more than willing to add people to, once they've learned Gerrit permissions.
In addition, unless you make a group you're in the owner of the repo (which can't be done via the GUI, only the CLI--this is a bug), you won't be able to set permissions at all (this is by design).
Are current permission groups viewable anywhere?
Chad's tutorial https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Git/Creating_new_repositories includes a link to "people who are allowed to create new repositories" https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/admin/groups/119,members, if you were looking for that.
Bergi
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 7:55 PM, Bergi a.d.bergi@web.de wrote:
Platonides schrieb:
On 01/06/12 17:41, Chad wrote:
I did make a new "Project Creators" group that I'm more than willing to add people to, once they've learned Gerrit permissions.
In addition, unless you make a group you're in the owner of the repo (which can't be done via the GUI, only the CLI--this is a bug), you won't be able to set permissions at all (this is by design).
Are current permission groups viewable anywhere?
Chad's tutorial https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Git/Creating_new_repositories includes a link to "people who are allowed to create new repositories" https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/admin/groups/119,members, if you were looking for that.
More generally, there's the group listing in gerrit that's viewable to all logged in users[0]. Every group should be publicly viewable and show the users in it (other than LDAP groups, but this is a known bug and very few of our groups are LDAP based)
-Chad
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org