Re: anaconda-patches mailing list

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 2:16 PM, Bruno Wolff III <bruno@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
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.

Very true.  We were considering gitorious at one point, but I'm glad we didn't.
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.)

It's been a surprise to a lot of us, actually.  But everything from contributions from Fedora users (both FAS account holders and non-FAS users) to companies like Facebook contributing to anaconda, the visibility and accessibility is better than we've had through other means.
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.)

Sure.  I need to look at Pagure again.  It's been a few months.  It would be nice for Pagure to gain some success stories for hosting projects.  It took github and others a while to build that up.
Thanks for elaborating on the benefits the anaconda project gets from github.

No problem.


David Cantrell <dcantrell@xxxxxxxxxx>
Manager, Installer Engineering Team
Red Hat, Inc. | Westford, MA | EST5EDT
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list

[Index of Archives]     [Kickstart]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Legacy List]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]
  Powered by Linux