Just making sure the whole original message made it to rel-eng list. Reply-to is set to infra@ so we can keep discussion in one place.
On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 12:08:35PM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
Can you please report this to releng also?
Dennis
El jue, 20-04-2017 a las 15:45 +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon escribió:
Good Morning Everyone,
I figured it has been a while since I reported progress on making pagure a front-end for dist-git.
So here is a small status update.
What works:
- Well currently pagure is working as a front-end for dist-git in stg:
https://src.stg.fedoraproject.org/pagure/
- Hosting repos, browsing them, creating PR works all fine (w/ one , see
below)
- Features we want to exclude have been turned off (no user management on the
pagure side)
What does not work:
- Syncing the ACLs from pkgdb to gitolite takes ~3 minutes in prod, in stg, the
updated script in stg (which sync the ACLs from pkgdb to gitolite and pagure) runs in ~30/35 minutes (if it doesn't crash, which my last run just did) This is a blocker since it means it takes 30 to 35 minutes for someone to get access to their git repo or (worse) their fork
- This pagure instance has the same issue as the main one, including a heisenbug
we're trying to track but have had no luck reproducing so far :(
What needs to be done:
- Fix the sync script
- Make it *way* faster than it is - Make it creates the project on pagure using the releng user rather than relying on the first contributor it finds in the list of maintainers - Make fedmsg-genacls be triggered on pagure's fork fedmsg message so that we re-generate the gitolite configuration file when someone forks a project (and thus give them access to their fork)
- Once above is done: call for more testers
In the future:
- I think we will want to deprecate pkgdb entirely, so while the work above is
important, ideally it won't be there for too long.
- With pkgdb out of the loop, we'll need to figure some things out:
- Where/How to store the contact info for bugzilla - Not sure relying on pagure's ACLs there is the way to go since we would loose a level of granularity in the ACLs that I know people like and ask for (having commit w/o being on the CC list in bugzilla or being on the CC list w/o being a packager) - How/when to require people be part of the packager group in FAS? - Since one of the idea of pagure is to make it easier for "drive-by" contribution to spec files, requiring to be a packager should only be there for maintainers, but pagure doesn't have this level of information/requirement, so we would need to find something or some place to add this requirement or see if that requirement still stands
This is all I can think of for now, I'll update this thread if I come up with more ideas/challenges.
Have a nice day, Pierre