Fedora hosted planning

[Pierre-Yves Chibon]

On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 11:12:30AM -0500, Ralph Bean wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 03, 2015 at 01:30:26PM -0700, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> > On 3 March 2015 at 13:22, Kevin Fenzi <kevin at scrye.com> wrote:
> > > So, as I see it, our options are:
> > >
> > > 1 Just move to ansible, leave on rhel6 for now until we decide
> > >   something better.
> > >
> > > 2 Move to ansible and rhel7, and build out trac-1.0 and plugins in
> > >   epel7. This will take a bit longer since there's so many plugins, but
> > >   shouldn't really be that hard.
> 
> I'd vote for 1 or 2 as things we can accomplish shorter-term.

Depending on how is/hard it is, I'd vote for this as well (see below).

> > >
> > > 3 Move to ansible and rhel7 and progit. I'm not sure if progit is ready
> > >   to replace trac though. I think it might need wiki features and also
> > >   more ticket handling stuff, since some of our projects use trac
> > >   ticketing heavily.
> > >
> > > 4 a combo of 2 and 3 (ie, offer trac and progit both)
> > >
> > > 5. a combo of 1 and 3 (ie, old trac projects stay on old hosted, we
> > > move ones that want to progit, eventually we have a flag day and move
> > > the rest).
> > >
> > >
> > 5 sounds like the most likely. There are a lot of work flows which groups
> > are using with the current trac. If they didn't.. they would have probably
> > moved over to github by now. Having the old boxes on ansible is probably
> > faster by at least 18 months over getting people moved to the newer system.
> 
> I'm not sure progit is going to be ready to wholesale replace
> fedorahosted anytime soon.  Perhaps we can 'promote' it though to get
> more of an idea of where its at, say give it a domain name at
> progit.cloud.fedoraproject.org ?  Let's get a few more people/projects
> using it.

While I kinda hope progit gets to a state where it is used and useful, I do not
see our trac instances all moving away any time soon (thus the vote for 1
or/and 2).

Having progit.dev.fedoraproject and later maybe progit.fedoraproject.org would
already help (I'd rather have .dev. than .cloud. in the url as I believe it is
more indicative of the state of the application there).
I am planning on blogging and calling for testers once I got around fixing what
I still want to fix (unit-tests and finish the git integration for tickets, git
integration for pull-request is on the roadmap but I won't wait for it before
calling for testers). More people testing will likely also help finding out how
usable the system is.

> I'm not sure that adding wiki features and trying to get parity with
> trac's ticketing system are going to be simple.  A barebones
> implementation could be done, but there will be a long stream of
> support/RFE tickets that follow if we head down that road.

Regarding progit, it will not grow a wiki feature but offers the possibility to
have a doc repo containing text, html, markdown or rest files (the last two will
be rendered, the first two display).

For the ticketing system, we currently have:
 Tags:
 Assigned:
 Blocking:
 Depends on:
 Status:
So there won't be a roadmap as there is in trac, but this can be implemented
using the Tags, issue dependency is in, as well as assigning issues.

Do we need something else?


Pierre
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/infrastructure/attachments/20150304/3815f696/attachment.sig>