On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 11:36, Iñaki Ucar <iucar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 00:08, Leigh Griffin <lgriffin@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2020, 22:06 Iñaki Ucar <iucar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 20:58, Leigh Griffin <lgriffin@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >
>> > This thread is serving as a source of requirements (although it has meandered dramatically away from that)
>>
>> When I first read the post, my thought was: wow, what a convoluted and
>> abstruse way of saying "we want to abandon Pagure". Probably this
>> wasn't your intent, but that's what I got. And given the reactions,
>> other people too.
>
> The linked blog to the ODF is very explicit that Pagure is one of the 3 forge options we are considering. I can't stress enough that it's a viable choice and ultimately what we opt for will come down to an analysis driven by the requirements gathered. I'm unsure how the blog has been interpreted any other way but hopefully this clears it up.
The ODF is very explicit in the problem statement, and it specifically
and clearly says that:
1. Pagure does not align with CPE.
2. CPE is not gonna commit a development team to Pagure.
3. The feature gap is big and growing, and basically Pagure is gonna
die because of this (and the document goes on saying that you're not
trying to solve the feature gap).
Then the ODF lists Pagure as a solution. How am I supposed to
interpret the above?
That the current situation is not ideal and before making any decisions it is better to know exactly what are the use cases. It makes sense to keep Pagure as a solution since we already know that it is matching most of Fedora's needs, but Pagure has a few down side too and the main one is that we have to develop and maintain it. So while the current situation works, it is not great. We might just find out that the other options are actually worst, or not. To me that's the all point of this process, let's put down what we *really* *really* need and then look at the different options.
Also there are many possibilities, for example a group of people could step up and take over the maintenance of Pagure so that CPE would just run the instances, just like it is done with Koji. Or another distro, project could be willing to use and contribute to Pagure so that we would share the development and maintenance effort. It is not forbidden to imagine such possibilities :-)
> If you (and others) elaborate on how you use Pagure (and other forges) and what you value from your day to day usage, we will take that on board and use it to drive our decision making.
Asking for requirements for a *forge* is pointless. A forge doesn't
have requirements. What you do with a forge has requirements.
As
others have already pointed out, Pagure is being used at the very
least for 3 distinct use cases: to maintain rpm packages, to maintain
upstream projects, and as an issue tracker. And they all have distinct
requirements. Only that, as it happens, Pagure has grown to cover
their necessities with more or less success, which doesn't necessarily
mean that a forge is the best solution for all of them (as, again,
others have pointed out already). But the ODF only lists forges as
solutions.
So solutions for what? What are we talking about here? Requirements
for src.fp.org? Requirements for things that are in pagure.io? All?
Other?
My understanding is that we are looking at all use cases.
Iñaki
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
