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
> _______________________________________________
> infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave(a)lists.fedoraproj
>
ect.org
_______________________________________________
infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
--
Paul W. Frields