-- snip -- > > As for Pagure itself, I think this is where we fundamentally > disagree. > I think it behooves us to own and provide an experience tailored for > our community from beginning to end. That's why we have Koji, Bodhi, > Dist-Git, and many other tools in that part of the lifecycle. The > packager experience is literally the lifeblood of the project, and > our > contributors are the core of what makes Fedora successful. Pagure > gives us an opportunity to do right by them that I *really* don't > think we can do with any alternatives. > > That does *not* mean that CPE team should be the sole owner of the > Pagure *codebase*. On that point, I agree. And that's why I've spent > a > lot of time and energy since late 2018 working on building up that > community. It's finally starting to bear fruit too: there's at least > one entity interested in building a product around it and > contributing > to help support that product, there's the FSF preparing to launch a > new forge using Pagure, there's the Trisquel GNU+Linux distribution > working on a Pagure deployment to host their code and packaging, and > there's a few other things I've got up my sleeve to help broaden the > community with not just users, but also contributors. It's great to hear this. Thanks a lot Neal for trying to find consumers. I'm not sure if this information was available to Fedora infrastructure during the decision. It means that we may have another contributors. I think Fedora Infra should talk to these potential contributors to find out how much they are willing to contribute to Pagure and re-think the decision based on that. It's big difference if this is just a Fedora tool or if it is used and developed by others too. Jirka > > Are there deficiencies in Pagure? Of course there are. I'm not > claiming that Pagure is perfect. But I think that keeping on with > Pagure and giving that community an opportunity to close the gap on > needed features for Fedora/CentOS/Red Hat is the right way to go. > Right now, I don't *know* what the important gaps are. I can make > some > guesses, but it'd be a lot better if we had a list of missing > features > and their relative important and why. That would help focus > development to meet those needs. > > The Fedora community itself has indicated that they want to keep on > with Pagure, and many Fedorans are Pythonistas, which means that > everyone can easily contribute to help make it better for everyone. > > Anyway, I hope this helps clarify my position on the matter! > > [1]: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/message/Y5XXXHJCSDMOHA7FEZ3DNZYPGCTZBVH6/ > > > > > -- > 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! > _______________________________________________ > 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
