Hey folks!
There's a post on the Community Blog:
https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/git-forge-requirements
and a thread on devel@:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/...
explaining that CPE is considering 'the future of a git forge solution which will be run by the CPE team on behalf of the Fedora Community', i.e. possibly ditching Pagure. The named contenders so far are Pagure, Gitlab and Github.
The devel@ thread is going to be the usual tire fire, but I think we should write up something on this and send it to the Council (who are supposed to represent the interests of Fedora 'communities' in this process). Obviously we use Pagure for project hosting, issue tracking, and we're also working on the new async blockerbugs process, which relies on integration with Pagure.
Can folks (especially those working on the blockerbugs stuff) read through the posts and think about what requirements we have here? I don't think it's going to be useful to have a big argument about the specific contenders here (see devel@ for that!) but it would be good to write up what QA actually needs in a forge. I'll try and gather the feedback and organize it into something to send to Council.
Thanks everyone!
On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 10:00 AM Adam Williamson adamwill@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Hey folks!
There's a post on the Community Blog:
https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/git-forge-requirements
and a thread on devel@:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/...
explaining that CPE is considering 'the future of a git forge solution which will be run by the CPE team on behalf of the Fedora Community', i.e. possibly ditching Pagure. The named contenders so far are Pagure, Gitlab and Github.
The devel@ thread is going to be the usual tire fire, but I think we should write up something on this and send it to the Council (who are supposed to represent the interests of Fedora 'communities' in this process). Obviously we use Pagure for project hosting, issue tracking, and we're also working on the new async blockerbugs process, which relies on integration with Pagure.
Can folks (especially those working on the blockerbugs stuff) read through the posts and think about what requirements we have here? I don't think it's going to be useful to have a big argument about the specific contenders here (see devel@ for that!) but it would be good to write up what QA actually needs in a forge. I'll try and gather the feedback and organize it into something to send to Council.
(Replying here and not devel list to consolidate our thoughts first)
Hmm, I don't think we have some very special requirements. For the planned blocker review async discussion, we need API to be able to add comments and edit the ticket description, ideally also adjust ticket tags, milestones or some other properties. We need a webhook support to get notified of changes or access to a message bus. Nothing unusual I think. Or, of course, native support for voting/polls (ideally multiple per a single ticket) would be even better :-)
As for general requirements, or at least very nice to have's, I'd probably repeat what was already mentioned in devel list: open source, with a good integration to Fedora core services (the account system, messaging).
On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 04:02:42PM +0100, Kamil Paral wrote:
I don't think we have some very special requirements. For the planned blocker review async discussion, we need API to be able to add comments and edit the ticket description, ideally also adjust ticket tags, milestones or some other properties. We need a webhook support to get notified of changes or access to a message bus. Nothing unusual I think. Or, of course, native support for voting/polls (ideally multiple per a single ticket) would be even better :-)
Can you put the voting/polls idea in the form of a user story?
On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 4:37 PM Matthew Miller mattdm@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Can you put the voting/polls idea in the form of a user story?
I think #44 on the list I sent covers that: As a Fedora team member, I can vote +1/abstain/-1 on issues so that I can approve or deny proposals.
On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 10:42 PM Ben Cotton bcotton@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 4:37 PM Matthew Miller mattdm@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Can you put the voting/polls idea in the form of a user story?
I think #44 on the list I sent covers that: As a Fedora team member, I can vote +1/abstain/-1 on issues so that I can approve or deny proposals.
We would actually need several polls per ticket, so that we can vote on Beta/Final Blocker/FE from a single discussion (and not 4 separate tickets). I'll add that user story.
On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 10:35 AM Kamil Paral kparal@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 10:42 PM Ben Cotton bcotton@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 4:37 PM Matthew Miller mattdm@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Can you put the voting/polls idea in the form of a user story?
I think #44 on the list I sent covers that: As a Fedora team member, I can vote +1/abstain/-1 on issues so that I can approve or deny proposals.
We would actually need several polls per ticket, so that we can vote on Beta/Final Blocker/FE from a single discussion (and not 4 separate tickets). I'll add that user story.
Done, replied to the devel thread. Feel free to add whatever you think is missing.
-
Adam Williamson -
Ben Cotton -
Kamil Paral -
Matthew Miller