On Wed, 11 Sep 2019 at 15:06, Ankur Sinha <sanjay.ankur(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hello,
I was looking for information on the future of the packages
application[1]. I didn't see it mentioned in the commblog post[2].
Currently the application is in a kind of maintenance mode (in reality I
don't have much time to look at tickets). This application is really
valuable and used a lot, but the big problem is the technology stack it is
built on TurboGears2 and making an heavy use of Moksha (
https://moksha.readthedocs.io/en/latest/), while TG2 is still active
upstream, this is not the case with Moksha and some of the TG2 dependencies
the application has. The effort to move away from these 2 framework is
quite high and I don't think we currently have the cycles for it.
My personal opinion is that we should really try to consolidate on src.fp.o
and instead of investing time in porting packages to more recent
technologies we should put that effort in adding the missing features to
src.fp.o.
Is it OK for us to link to the packages application in documentation, or
should we just link to src.fp.o already (in the NeuroFedora
documentation[3]) for example?
The one thing that makes us prefer the packages app is that it has the
install command listed there while src.fp.o does not. That makes the
packages app somewhat more appropriate for end-users than
src.fp.o---src.fp.o has links to all the other build pipelines
That's sounds like something that could be easily solved. For example
having a simple README.md for each package with a Description, How to
install and How to report Bugs.