Launchpad has a "reviewer" that can be set per-repository. It defaults to the repository owner. I suspect this controls whether you can set a branch to Approved or not.
It might be possible for git-ubuntu to always set this to some team. But which team? The repository reviewer is something that should be set correctly for a package as it applies Ubuntu-wide, so can't just be something server-specific for server team workflow. Since it's repository-wide, using core-dev vs. motu won't work very well as packages move between archive components.
There was some scope in Launchpad's git design to allow for a "person who can upload this package" type ACL entity, although this hasn't been implemented. Maybe the same needs to be done for repository reviewer.
In the meantime, perhaps core-dev might work to at least reduce the pain for those who are core devs, even if that is a blunt instrument.
Launchpad has a "reviewer" that can be set per-repository. It defaults to the repository owner. I suspect this controls whether you can set a branch to Approved or not.
It might be possible for git-ubuntu to always set this to some team. But which team? The repository reviewer is something that should be set correctly for a package as it applies Ubuntu-wide, so can't just be something server-specific for server team workflow. Since it's repository-wide, using core-dev vs. motu won't work very well as packages move between archive components.
There was some scope in Launchpad's git design to allow for a "person who can upload this package" type ACL entity, although this hasn't been implemented. Maybe the same needs to be done for repository reviewer.
In the meantime, perhaps core-dev might work to at least reduce the pain for those who are core devs, even if that is a blunt instrument.