Fedora Community

Luke Macken lmacken at redhat.com
Thu Jul 7 00:22:51 UTC 2011

Excerpts from Stephen John Smoogen's message of Wed Jul 06 19:34:46 -0400 2011:
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 15:53, Luke Macken <lmacken at redhat.com> wrote:
> > Excerpts from Stephen John Smoogen's message of Tue Jul 05 17:44:46 -0400 2011:
> >> No not http://fedoracommunity.org but
> >> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/community/ It has been in beta for 2
> >> years now. What do we need to do to finish it (maybe make it
> >> start.fedoraproject.org?) or put it aside for other things to do?
> >
> > This app was never really intended to ever be "finished". It was meant
> > to be a platform for building widgets to visualize Fedora data. However,
> > I do think it's definitely still 'beta' quality, and the original
> > authors (J5, Mo, and I), have not had the cycles to continue to improve
> > it. We accomplished our initial goals, and then got pulled into
> > different directions (one of which was working on the core of the
> > platform, Moksha).
> >
> > Personally, I still use fedoracommunity on a regular basis, and find it
> > to be extremely useful in many ways. Right now we do not have any idea
> > as to how many people are using it. I think we should do some log
> Did the following quick statistics using awk:
> Currently we are seeing 380->420 unique ip addresses per month who are
> not bots or not referrals from other sites. Most go to /community/ but
> ~100 of them made queries beyond standard page data (images,
> javascript, and /community/). While it doesn't sound a lot.. for a
> site that doesn't have a lot of advertising it is an audience.

Wow, yeah, that's more of an audience than I expected. Thanks for
figuring that out.

> > With regard to the claims that the AGPL makes this app difficult to
> > maintain -- I honestly cannot recall a single case where we had to
> > hotfix it and jump through the AGPL hoops. If anything, this helped us
> > figure out what it takes to develop, deploy, and maintain both
> > TurboGears2 and AGPL applications.
> We did it twice right after it was deployed. We went one way in how we
> were going to do this and had to undo it the next day when Tom got
> clarification that pointing to tickets/patches was not acceptable. If
> we could move to Apache or just GPL I would be quite happy. My memory
> of it was that there was a bunch of stuff having to be done right
> then, but it is a memory and probably not a good one.

Are you sure we got clarification that pointing to tickets was *not*
acceptable? Because we currently have a "Fedora Infrastructure Hotfixes"
link that points to:


Either way, I do vaguely remember those hotfixes now that you mention

I still think that keeping our fedoracommunity frontend AGPL is a good
thing. We did, however, recently change the core platform (Moksha), from
AGPL to Apache.


More information about the infrastructure mailing list