On 10/11/2017 07:23 PM, Christopher wrote: > Hi, > > Pagure seems to play several roles in the Fedora community, but it's a bit > confusing. Perhaps somebody can respond (or write a Wiki article on the > topic) to clear up some confusion. I can try... > For example, I hear/read the term "dist-git" a lot, but most of the > conversation about that seems to focus on Pagure being used to host Fedora > source repos. I don't really understand how these terms relate to each > other. dist-git is https://github.com/release-engineering/dist-git Basically a setup of git and scripts for hosting a collection of repos + lookaside cache. pkgs.fedoraproject.org was/is a example of this. > Another example: all the documentation for the transition away from Pkgdb > seems to reference pagure.io. However, that doesn't appear to be where the > things have moved to. Rather, things have moved to a different instance of > Pagure hosted at src.fedoraproject.org. How are these two separate > instances of Pagure related to one another, why are they separate, and what > separate roles do they each serve for Fedora packagers and contributors? pagure.io is for "upstream" projects and general trackers. This is a replacement for fedorahosted.org and similar to github or gitlab. src.fedoraproject.org is a pagure instance + a pagure dist git extension ( https://pagure.io/pagure-dist-git ). It is only for distribution packages. It's setup differently to work with the special cases distro packages have vs general source code. Things like no issue trackers (we use bugzilla), groups synced from fas, ssh keys synced from fas, etc. > Are there any other instances of Pagure that are relevant to Fedora > packagers? There is a staging instance we use to test new pagure releases: https://stg.pagure.io > Are there any other roles that an existing instance of Pagure should be > serving, but currently isn't? For example, I've noticed that > src.fedoraproject.org has disabled issues on repos. However, I personally > would love to use it as an issue tracker instead of Bugzilla. I understand > that Bugzilla is more integrated with other services, but having issues > enabled would be a nice option in the future, as moving issue trackers > closer to the source is one of the best things that has come out of the > various git hosting services. We could of course do this, but yeah, there's a bunch of things we use bugzilla for right now. Someone would have to look at all those and propose something to fesco and get the community to buy in. > So far, I like Pagure. I also like similar git hosting services, such as > GitLab and GitHub, but I don't think we're making the best use of it, if > we're customizing separate deployments of it instead of providing a generic > service and customizing the integrations to it. Perhaps somebody can help > explain, with a summary of the choices which have been made and the reasons > behind those choices, why (for better or worse) this is the direction > Fedora is headed? I did my best above. Feel free to ask more, or wait for better answers from Pingou. ;) kevin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
