On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 2:11 PM, Kamil Paral <kparal@redhat.com> wrote:
> I don't have any serious issues, as long as we only use pagure as git host. I
> hate that "we wanted to copy github, but stopped just after we found out
> it's too much functionality" thing (also don't like how github works on top
> of that, so even a 1:1 clone would be awful from my perspective).

Just a remark, Pagure development hasn't stopped, it constantly receives new functionality [1]. But I agree it's not likely to be that featureful as github any time soon, and I'd be wary if we wanted to move our whole workflow there (i.e. ditching Phabricator). For just hosting git repos, it's of course absolutely fine. We'll need to discuss whether we want to keep the issues/pull requests open there to receive some simple reports/patches (and ask people to move more complex ones to Phab), or whether we'll not use that in Pagure at all. (Let's not forget we also have libtaskotron in Bugzilla, fortunately it's not used much yet).

I am personaly against issues/pull requests on Pagure - logging into Phab is about as difficult as logging into Pagure, and I don't see the benefit of "allowing people to do it, since it's possible" even balancing out the problem of split environments.
But that's just me.