On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 13:29:16 -0400, David Cantrell <dcantrell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Changing the development workflow is not something we've ever taken lightly. There have been two major shifts in the last 10+ years. First was the move from cvs to git. The second was to move off Fedora infrastructure to github, and that decision wasn't just rushed through.
I wouldn't expect anything soon. Pagure has promise, but it is too soon to say where things are going to go, and without that assurance moving is risky.
github has made it significantly easier for us to accept contributions from other individuals and companies. Like it or not, github has succeeded in making contributing to projects easy. If Pagure is just duplicating this functionality, fine, but that's not a good enough reason for us to change the development workflow. A large part of us wanting to move off Fedora infrastructure was the barrier to entry for gaining outside contributors. It was simply too high.
I didn't expect anaconda to benefit that much from github's network effects. But given that it is, that would make Pagure hard to consider soon. The hosting service (as opposed to code) requires FAS accounts which would be a barrier to entry for the many people that have github accounts but not FAS accounts. (And I wouldn't expect Github to ever help out by becoming an identity provider that Pagure could rely on in addition to FAS.)
I'm not saying yes or no regarding moving things off github, but just that there are significant benefits to github that are very beneficial to the project right now.
It does seem that way. But if you do see technology issues that could be improved in Pagure it would be nice to hear about them. (That you may notice when using it for some Fedora upstreams that are there.)
Thanks for elaborating on the benefits the anaconda project gets from github. _______________________________________________ Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list