On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 3:30 PM Pierre-Yves Chibon <pingou@pingoured.fr> wrote:
On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 04:06:22PM +0100, Julen Landa Alustiza wrote:
>    Per git ref acls is not a common thing on git forges. If this is a final
>    requirement, we should start analyzing the viability of implementing and
>    maintain it on the different forges (and it should be feasible with all of
>    the rest of our strange ACLs on dist-git)
>
>    On pagure side, now that our downstream instances are not using gitolite,
>    implementing them needs much less work that migrating all our toolings to
>    other solutions.

I believe, and Leigh correct me if I'm wrong, that this will be the next step in
the analysis.

1/ gather all the requirement
2/ figure out which option have which requirement
3/ figure out if it is "cheaper" to fix feature A in option 2, or add feature B
in option 3 or leave without feature C in option 1

Correct we will perform an analysis on the requirements Vs the offerings. It then becomes a cost benefit analysis to build out (or acquire) feature A at the cost of refactoring process B and so on. We will publish the wider requirements and the analysis to help support a transparent decision.
 

Pierre
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
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@lists.fedoraproject.org


--

Leigh Griffin

Engineering Manager

Red Hat Waterford

Communications House

Cork Road, Waterford City

lgriffin@redhat.com    
M: +353877545162    
 IM: lgriffin