On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 03:11:41PM -0500, seth vidal wrote: > Summary from the meeting: > > Today in the infrastructure meeting we started talking about how to > move the new packages and tagger apps into production and where we want > them to live in the layout of urls. > > > Goals: > 1. simple for users and remember > 2. not overlapping with any of the older apps or existing urls > 3. futureproofing for new apps or different interfaces > 4. expanding the number of apps we have w/o having them grouped under a > single project (like community was). > > Non-Goals of this setup: > - no interest in preserving the old admin.fp.o/community urls > - no interest in pinning anything/everything behind admin.fp.o > > > Suggestions: > > packages.fedoraproject.org > > some concerns about this are it is a bit confusing with > pkgs.fedoraproject.org. > > A couple of ideas there are: > 1. make the new packages app be the frontpage for pkgs.fp.o - since > gitweb is.... not performant there. > Yeah -- if we have the package's app display a link (maybe from the sources tab) to the gitweb that might just work. Alternately, the only reasons to keep gitweb are 1) urls and 2) history. If the packages application grows hstory viewing capability, perhaps that would not be needed. > 2. move pkgs.fp.o to git.fp.o or to fedpkg.fp.o and let the new app > take over the other urls. > There was a reason we didn't use git.fp.o... maybe mmcgrath would remember better than me. fedpkg.fp.o would be slightly confusing since we have a fedpkg package and becomes moreso if we move fedorahosted projects to <appname>.fedorahosted.org domains. If we do move the gitweb domain we'd be breaking the URLs into gitweb which I know we wanted to avoid in the past... May be an opportunity to move to cgit (I think that was the name) instead of gitweb, though. That might solve our performance issues. > > These are just some suggestions we discussed in the meeting. > > Please submit more ideas. I'd love to hear more proposed names. So far, using the new app as the entry point to gitweb and then using packages.apps.fp.o sounds like the best plan but it also seems somewhat hacky. We should talk about what other things we want to move from pkgdb into the new community. As we talk about a projectwide shift in urls to <appname>.apps.fedoraproject.org/, packages.apps.fp.o, and pkgdb.apps.fp.o are also confusingly similar. We could aim to move all of the pkgdb functionality into the new packages/community app. Or we could make the new community app the front end to it similar to how we're talking about for gitweb. Or we might want to rename in some other way. -Toshio
Attachment:
pgpVcdVpZYZF1.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure
