How about appengine.fedoraproject.org ? On 1/21/12, Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 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 > -- Best Regards, Christopher Meng------'Cicku' My personal blog is http://cicku.me,hope you can visit and say something about it. More Contact info see here:http://about.me/cicku _______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure
