On 1/7/19 1:04 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: ...snip... > It'd be better if it was easier for more people to participate. We > have a lot of infra-types. It's kind of amazing in a bad way that > despite all that, we don't really have an easy way for more people to > help on that side. There definitely is...become an appentice, send patches for things, get added to other groups and help out with that area. True more access takes more time, but we definitely have had community folks helping out. ...snip... > > Pagure as a project is starting to pick up steam in its own right. And > users outside of Fedora (both public and private) are also turning > into contributors. If anything, this is one of the better successes > we've had in a while. > > As for the feature development, Pagure is keeping pace with solutions > like GitHub. We're now at the point where Pagure meets the features > that Debian was requesting for their Alioth migration, and other > groups are considering rolling out Pagure instances as well. > > As for the pagure.io forge, a large part of its lack of success is that > people don't know how to move to it. Heck, even I don't really know > how to effectively migrate a project from GitHub.com or GitLab.com or > some other site to Pagure.io and migrate things like issues, PRs, etc. > It is a good solution and it is developing rapidly into being a good > competitor to the others. https://pagure.io/pagure-importer was used to migrate things from trac, and it has a github mode, but I am not sure what state it's in. >>> * openstack (The big consumer here is copr... if it could move to the >>> cloud or somewhere and we didn't need a openstack I would be very happy). >> >> Yes. I think this is something we can make happen. Possibly we can work >> something out with Mass Open Cloud. >> > > I think it's pretty obvious our Copr host platform (RHOSP 5) has been > a disappointment. It's unfortunate that there's no formal avenue for > people to sponsor and offer resources to improve services like Copr > and assist with improving the quality of the service. People want to > depend on it, and it's still not getting the love it needs. I'm not sure how donated resources could help here. How could we trust that they were not tampering with builds? How about someone donating instances that are all slow, slowing down builds. What happens if the network is down between copr and the donated stuff? Its a can of worms. ;( I'm sure there are solutions to all these, but copr doesn't have any of those in place currently. > Supposedly it was going to be upgraded and improved, but I dunno > what's going on there. Beyond that, we should consider making it > possible for people and companies to be able to sponsor effort and > resources in Fedora, similar to what openSUSE does. That's how their > OBS has so much more resources than our Koji and Copr systems > combined. I have been working on a new openstack for the last N months. It's pretty close to ready finally, but it sounds like perhaps we want to drop it and move stuff elsewhere now. > >>> I think things like koji are particularly ill suited to move anywhere >>> since we need to run Fedora on the builders, they have to run virt, and >>> we have lots of arches that aren't commonly available in cloud. >> >> Yeah, multi-arch is going to be a sticking point for a lot of things. >> > > Losing the ability for people to be able to trivially self-host > variants of our infrastructure would be a huge loss, in my mind. Yeah. kevin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ council-discuss mailing list -- council-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to council-discuss-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/council-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
