-- 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@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/Y5XXXHJCSDMOHA7FEZ3DNZYPGCTZBVH6/
>
>
>
>
> --
> 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
> _______________________________________________
> 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
_______________________________________________
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