Umm, I maybe on the wrong side of things but can there be a hash generation api or something for FAS using OAUTH as the base? Its an idea so that we can collaborate with external applications. Good idea or bad? On 21/02/2011 5:40 p.m., Ricky Zhou wrote: > On 2011-02-21 01:33:01 PM, Ruediger Landmann wrote: >> This decision has greatly saddened and disappointed me. With all respect >> to Dmitris and his team, to me, it seems like Fedora is giving up a key >> part of our infrastructure and our independence. > First, let me say - I'm happy as long as the work gets done to make > a Transifex instance usable and maintained for translators. > > But one question - can you quantify exactly what we lose with switching to > transifex.net? We discussed this in infrastructure, and the conclusion > was that we only lose FAS auth (and we already spoke to spot about any > CLA issues, and he said that it shouldn't be an issue). In return, we > get an actually maintained Transifex instance that won't be (often) > unusable and slow for translators. > > What independence do we have with running our own instance? We don't > have the people to maintain/upgrade it, and while we have the freedom to > make code changes to our instance, we certainly don't have the manpower > to actually make that happen. On the other hand, Dimitris and other > Transifex developers have already been willing to put time into helping > us with our instance, taking bug reports and patches from us, and making > sure that we have good service on transifex.net. > > The infrastructure team is already really happy not to have to put > manpower into running bugzilla.redhat.com, and the way I see it, having > a similar arrangement with transifex.net would be great for everybody. > > Thanks, > Ricky _______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure
