On 4/2/20 3:03 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
At the outset of this whole mess, quite a lot of people said "well this is obviously just all a pretext for dropping Pagure and going to hosted Gitlab". Much offence seemed to be taken at this, and much was made of this absolutely not being the case at all, and Pagure being definitely a contender, and - as was pointed out upthread - how there would be public meetings and feedback sessions and a whole three-ring circus before a final decision was made. Which very definitely hadn't already been made, or anything. And now three days into this thread, you're saying "well, CPE doesn't have the resources to maintain Pagure". So, what, people were right in the first place, and this was really just the Dump Pagure Project all along? If so what was the point of all this half-baked kabuki nonsense? Why not just say so up-front? If CPE never thought it had the resources to maintain Pagure and Pagure was never really a contender, and Github was as clearly a non-starter as Leigh says it was, why didn't we just say "yeah no we're going to Gitlab" four months (or whatever it was) ago and save all of this silliness? We agree that this process wasn't actually very open at all, but*even if it had been*, if the result was preordained, what would have been the point?
I agree with you. _______________________________________________ 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
