On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 13:08:05 -0400, Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
We did communicate as the very top line of our gathered requirements that open source is essential to our community and central to our feedback. I'm not trying to be soft on that. Let's just not do purity-test level assessments and instead focus on our goals.
The response from CPE made it sound like they just counted requirements rather than evalutating how important each requirement was to each group. Perhaps that was not intended, but that's they way it sounds. I think that being able to theorectically switch from hosted to self-hosted in short order (like in a month), should have been a deal breaking requirement from Fedora in case something at Gitlab changed that prevented using their hosted service. That implies having access to the source (capable of running our instance) with a free license and regular exports of the data in our hands. It doesn't sound like that is a requirement from the response provided by CPE.
Because of switching costs, this is likely to prevent us from going back to Pagure if it does develop a vibrant independent community. That would be unfortunate.
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
