On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 10:17:21AM +0100, Leigh Griffin wrote: > Hi everyone, > > Thank you for your patience while the CPE Team worked through an incredible > number of requirements from multiple stakeholder sources. On Friday evening > we announced on the Community Blog > <https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/making-a-git-forge-decision/> our > decision to adopt Gitlab as our Git Forge and to retain pagure.io to > ultimately hand over to the Community to maintain. It wasn't an easy > decision by any stretch of the imagination and we hope that the compromise > that we are striking will help to allow Pagure flourish and to give a > choice of Forges for your usage. I'm happy to field any questions or > comments about this decision. Overall I understand the decision to focus on GitLab & think it makes a lot of sense given the precedent of other large open source projects adopting it. I was always sceptical that there were enough resources invested to turn Pagure into a strong competitor, especially when other large projects that could have been potential users & contributors of Pagure (GNOME, FreeDesktop, KDE, etc) all picked GitLab. That said I have some issues with the blog. It doesn't distiguish very well between Pagure as the dist-git instance, and Pagure as a general "upstream" project hosting instance, so it is hard to intepret what applies to what. The language is murky & contradictory "Keep Pagure running with our oversight while we analyse a sunset timeline which will give a minimum of 12 months notice once we have a plan firmed up. We will fix blocker bugs, address critical vulnerabilities and keep the lights on in the same manner that we have committed to over the last 14 months where Pagure has not been a staffed and supported initiative." The word "sunset" here tells me that pagure.io is going away and we'll need to move projects off it. Similarly the last sentence reinforces that Pagure is considered abandonware. At the same time the blog says "we do not want to abandon Pagure" and "provide them with guidance and oversight to help the Pagure Community grow. We recognise that this is a growing and unique ecosystem and we genuinely want to see it succeed and will do our best to support it in that capacity" which says that pagure.io is intended to carry on living and even grow. And "Offer the maintenance of pagure.io to anyone in the community interested in leading it." which says we want to abandon it, but perhaps some kind person might step in to rescue it, but we've no idea who that will be aside from some community group yet to be clearly identified. Overall I'm left with zero confidence about the future of general project hosting on pagure.io Having lived through Fedora Hosted arriving and then being killed, and now Pagure arriving and then being killed, I don't have any confidence in the future. Better to accept now that general project hosting is never going to be a core deliverable of Fedora and projects should focus on the primary gitlab.com instance if they need hosting that has got a chance of still existing in 3-5 years time. Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :| _______________________________________________ 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
