----- Original Message -----
From: "Ankur Sinha" <sanjay.ankur(a)gmail.com>
To: devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, "For participants of the Documentation
Sent: Monday, January 18, 2021 12:31:10 PM
Subject: Re: Migrating the Fedora Developer Portal to Fedora Docs
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 10:34:32 -0500, Pavel Valena wrote:
> > Could you clarify on this? One has to fork and open a PR to contribute
> > to the devportal too, right?
> Yes, you're right, but I think the process for github is intuitive,
> and the contributor does not work with commandline (was my main
> Pagure needs require FAS though, right? What are the ACLs? Can anyone
> open a PR? The process seems a bit more complicated, and I'm not sure
> how many people already have github account, compared to FAS (does any
> of them support oauth from 3rd party? I'm unsure).
As far as I know, only FAS is enabled for pagure.io. I *think* that's
intentional, though---it allows integration with the rest of Fedora over
fedora-messaging and so on. A mirror of the repo on Pagure for PRs over
GitHub can always be maintained. Lots of projects already do it. Fpaste
is an example:
Good idea. Having only FAS would hopefully be fine as well.
Anyone with an account on Pagure can open PRs. One can define groups for
access etc., pretty much the same as on GitHub.
> > > Unfortunately, I don't have any spare cycles to do anything like that
> > > (I don't have much for the maintenance either).
> > I think that's another reason to merge it with docs, which will be
> > managed by the community, both infrastructure and content wise.
> Agreed. Well, if it migrates well :), anyway.
> IMO the UX seems a lot friendlier with Developer Portal, with several
> overviews, and it's also more granular (more sub-pages). Is there such
> feature (or a limit) in quick-docs? Also, there's no search (which
> limits the usability for me at least).
I'm afraid I don't know all the features of the Antora based system, so
someone from the Docs core team will have to chime in here.
The search function is high on the TODO list. I think @mattdm has spoken
to CPE about this too, so it's not too far on the horizon.
Good to hear some work is being done!
> I don't want to end up with few monolithic pages noone reads. (And
> it's aimed at developers, so english is almost natural I expect.)
Is there any information on how many people are reading the dev portal
now? We know lots of people are using the Docs now, and we are
I was not sure where to post this- I hope this is sufficient:
There's a download button if you don't like the view. Also let me know if you want
to know more / some other statistics.
How does this compare to quick-docs?
frequently helping new folks write more quick-docs (over at Ask
for example). We're using it as a gateway to contribution---lots of
users who tinker with their systems are happy to share their knowledge,
so we help them write new quick-docs on their topic of choice.
Right, that's the same as for Developer Portal.
> We could duplicate the content, however (for a while) and see how it
> compares, if you insist. Some automated translation (mirroring) would
> be a win-win IMO. Though I'm unsure it can be done.
I am not insisting at all. I am only wondering if it makes sense to have
another platform with information that the Docs are already designed to
hold. It splits the resources, and it makes users wonder where they
should look for information.
Well, it makes sense to move to another platform, if its use is better for some users. I
can only speak for myself, but currently I like the portal a bit more. At this point
there're not much resources (on the maintainers side), but the users may be confused
(it depends). I can see the aim you're going for, but I'm still unsure there's
a case for something to just cease existing, unless being replaced by something superior.
I don't think temporarily duplicating information is a good way to go.
That just makes it two copies that need to be updated then. If an
I'm more on the "can mirroring be done?" for that (I'd consider it
"another view" for the content). I don't want to do a manual syncs off
course. But for start, I was thinking about doing it in some staging quick-docs instance
and try to see how it would compare the current F. D. Portal, as a one-off.
agreement cannot be reached to migrate the info into Docs, I think
best to leave things as they are. The Docs team keeps working on the
Docs, and the Devportal team can keep working away there.
As a community member, I thought I'd ask. That's all :)
Sorry, I didn't mean to send / dismiss you away, or to generally disagree. I was just
playing a "devil's advocate" for the status quo, by raising some of the
unanswered questions I have. There can be solution off course, I didn't mean to say
otherwise, but I'm still unsure who / how / to what end would the migration effort
aim. Currently, there's scarcely any work being done on the Developer portal, so the
migration would need investigated & realized by some other community member(s).
Also, I know that's not the intention, but I'm treading carefully as I don't
think we want to lose the current audience. Although the updates are currently stuck, with
some spare cycles[*] that'll be resolved, ETA at the end of February.
* Not much, there's automation already in place - I need to revive an old VM for the
builds. Also some work was already done for the move into OpenShift, which was
unfortunatelly disrupted leading to current state.
Ankur Sinha "FranciscoD" (He / Him / His) |
Time zone: Europe/London