On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 11:12:30AM -0500, Ralph Bean wrote: > On Tue, Mar 03, 2015 at 01:30:26PM -0700, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > > On 3 March 2015 at 13:22, Kevin Fenzi <kevin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > So, as I see it, our options are: > > > > > > 1 Just move to ansible, leave on rhel6 for now until we decide > > > something better. > > > > > > 2 Move to ansible and rhel7, and build out trac-1.0 and plugins in > > > epel7. This will take a bit longer since there's so many plugins, but > > > shouldn't really be that hard. > > I'd vote for 1 or 2 as things we can accomplish shorter-term. Depending on how is/hard it is, I'd vote for this as well (see below). > > > > > > 3 Move to ansible and rhel7 and progit. I'm not sure if progit is ready > > > to replace trac though. I think it might need wiki features and also > > > more ticket handling stuff, since some of our projects use trac > > > ticketing heavily. > > > > > > 4 a combo of 2 and 3 (ie, offer trac and progit both) > > > > > > 5. a combo of 1 and 3 (ie, old trac projects stay on old hosted, we > > > move ones that want to progit, eventually we have a flag day and move > > > the rest). > > > > > > > > 5 sounds like the most likely. There are a lot of work flows which groups > > are using with the current trac. If they didn't.. they would have probably > > moved over to github by now. Having the old boxes on ansible is probably > > faster by at least 18 months over getting people moved to the newer system. > > I'm not sure progit is going to be ready to wholesale replace > fedorahosted anytime soon. Perhaps we can 'promote' it though to get > more of an idea of where its at, say give it a domain name at > progit.cloud.fedoraproject.org ? Let's get a few more people/projects > using it. While I kinda hope progit gets to a state where it is used and useful, I do not see our trac instances all moving away any time soon (thus the vote for 1 or/and 2). Having progit.dev.fedoraproject and later maybe progit.fedoraproject.org would already help (I'd rather have .dev. than .cloud. in the url as I believe it is more indicative of the state of the application there). I am planning on blogging and calling for testers once I got around fixing what I still want to fix (unit-tests and finish the git integration for tickets, git integration for pull-request is on the roadmap but I won't wait for it before calling for testers). More people testing will likely also help finding out how usable the system is. > I'm not sure that adding wiki features and trying to get parity with > trac's ticketing system are going to be simple. A barebones > implementation could be done, but there will be a long stream of > support/RFE tickets that follow if we head down that road. Regarding progit, it will not grow a wiki feature but offers the possibility to have a doc repo containing text, html, markdown or rest files (the last two will be rendered, the first two display). For the ticketing system, we currently have: Tags: Assigned: Blocking: Depends on: Status: So there won't be a roadmap as there is in trac, but this can be implemented using the Tags, issue dependency is in, as well as assigning issues. Do we need something else? Pierre
Attachment:
pgp6GeuFnJ5qY.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure
