Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Panu Matilainen]

On 9/15/23 20:27, Colin Walters wrote:

One thing I find amusing about this list (which like some others is kind of a 
long-running soap opera that happens to sometimes produce software as a side 
effect) is that many times, I can see just two bits of information:

- The subject of the email
- The name of the person responding

And I basically *know* what they're going to say.


Yeah, I've noticed this as well. It's what happens in a long 
relationship, such as marriage. You develop these certain trigger 
exchanges that replay over and over again, even as you often are aware 
of them. Many are mostly harmless (does ananas belong in pizza?), but 
not all.


Married to the community, now there's a thought :D


Maybe one morning I'll be drinking my coffee, reading a thread like this that has 
"issues.redhat.com" in the Subject and see e.g. Kevin Kofler reply, open up the email and 
he'll say actually something like "JIRA is so awesome!  I love the query language!"¹ and 
I'll just spew coffee all over my keyboard laughing in surprise.  We could all chose to reply to 
threads we ordinarily wouldn't, in a different way - just to, you know, spice things up a bit.  
Keep the viewers^Hreaders entertained.


Yes, the rarity of those trigger sequences going off rails makes them 
absolutely priceless. Like when the person hating olives suddenly 
changes their mind after 20 years.


- Panu -
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Colin Walters]

On Mon, Sep 18, 2023, at 3:57 AM, Petr Pisar wrote:
> V Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 01:27:23PM -0400, Colin Walters napsal(a):
>> To state the blindingly obvious thing, RHEL made a decision to centralize on
>> Gitlab.  Having Fedora be on pagure creates IMO unnecessary friction for me.
>> I would be quite curious to get some sort of survey of other engineers for
>> how they feel.
>
> My selfishly preferable option is not to use Gitlab.com for Fedora exactly
> because RHEL uses Gitlab.com. The reason is very practical: You need separate
> accounts for the two projects and GitLab.com is not good at using multiple
> accounts simulatenously. Having different systems makes to problem go away and
> my life easier.

I use https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/multi-account-containers/ 
for this and other places where I also have work and personal accounts - solves 
the problem nicely for me.  

(Now, one other special twist with two-account gitlab (and github) is dealing 
with ssh keys and remotes, but that's not too hard to solve either)
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Michael J Gruber]

Am Mo., 18. Sept. 2023 um 12:39 Uhr schrieb Petr Pisar :
>
> V Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 10:12:17AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé napsal(a):
> > On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 09:57:28AM +0200, Petr Pisar wrote:
> > > V Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 01:27:23PM -0400, Colin Walters napsal(a):
> > > > To state the blindingly obvious thing, RHEL made a decision to 
> > > > centralize on
> > > > Gitlab.  Having Fedora be on pagure creates IMO unnecessary friction 
> > > > for me.
> > > > I would be quite curious to get some sort of survey of other engineers 
> > > > for
> > > > how they feel.
> > >
> > > My selfishly preferable option is not to use Gitlab.com for Fedora exactly
> > > because RHEL uses Gitlab.com. The reason is very practical: You need 
> > > separate
> > > accounts for the two projects and GitLab.com is not good at using multiple
> > > accounts simulatenously. Having different systems makes to problem go 
> > > away and
> > > my life easier.
> >
> > You don't require separate accounts. It is a choice developers can
> > make to keep their upstream vs RHEL work in gitlab.com separated,
> > or under the same account. There are pros & cons, so it is really
> > a matter of personal preference.
> >
> It's is a matter of security. With a single account you give Fedora admins
> an access to RHEL and vice versa.

That is an interesting point, and one that was never clear to me from
the wording "organisation xy wants to manage your account": Which kind
of access do you grant Fedora (resp. RHEL) if you "join" that GitLab
organisation with an existing GitLab account?

If it's a Fedora hosted instance things are much clearer.

Michael
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Petr Pisar]

V Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 10:12:17AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé napsal(a):
> On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 09:57:28AM +0200, Petr Pisar wrote:
> > V Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 01:27:23PM -0400, Colin Walters napsal(a):
> > > To state the blindingly obvious thing, RHEL made a decision to centralize 
> > > on
> > > Gitlab.  Having Fedora be on pagure creates IMO unnecessary friction for 
> > > me.
> > > I would be quite curious to get some sort of survey of other engineers for
> > > how they feel.
> > 
> > My selfishly preferable option is not to use Gitlab.com for Fedora exactly
> > because RHEL uses Gitlab.com. The reason is very practical: You need 
> > separate
> > accounts for the two projects and GitLab.com is not good at using multiple
> > accounts simulatenously. Having different systems makes to problem go away 
> > and
> > my life easier.
> 
> You don't require separate accounts. It is a choice developers can
> make to keep their upstream vs RHEL work in gitlab.com separated,
> or under the same account. There are pros & cons, so it is really
> a matter of personal preference.
>
It's is a matter of security. With a single account you give Fedora admins
an access to RHEL and vice versa.

-- Petr


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Daniel P . Berrangé]

On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 09:57:28AM +0200, Petr Pisar wrote:
> V Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 01:27:23PM -0400, Colin Walters napsal(a):
> > To state the blindingly obvious thing, RHEL made a decision to centralize on
> > Gitlab.  Having Fedora be on pagure creates IMO unnecessary friction for me.
> > I would be quite curious to get some sort of survey of other engineers for
> > how they feel.
> 
> My selfishly preferable option is not to use Gitlab.com for Fedora exactly
> because RHEL uses Gitlab.com. The reason is very practical: You need separate
> accounts for the two projects and GitLab.com is not good at using multiple
> accounts simulatenously. Having different systems makes to problem go away and
> my life easier.

You don't require separate accounts. It is a choice developers can
make to keep their upstream vs RHEL work in gitlab.com separated,
or under the same account. There are pros & cons, so it is really
a matter of personal preference.

With regards,
Daniel
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Petr Pisar]

V Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 01:27:23PM -0400, Colin Walters napsal(a):
> To state the blindingly obvious thing, RHEL made a decision to centralize on
> Gitlab.  Having Fedora be on pagure creates IMO unnecessary friction for me.
> I would be quite curious to get some sort of survey of other engineers for
> how they feel.

My selfishly preferable option is not to use Gitlab.com for Fedora exactly
because RHEL uses Gitlab.com. The reason is very practical: You need separate
accounts for the two projects and GitLab.com is not good at using multiple
accounts simulatenously. Having different systems makes to problem go away and
my life easier.

-- Petr


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Neal Gompa]

On Sat, Sep 16, 2023 at 12:07 AM Kevin Kofler via devel
 wrote:
>
> Colin Walters wrote:
> > Also of salient note, to the best of my knowledge the dist-git equivalent
> > for Amazon Linux's isn't public.
>
> Neither is the one for RHEL.
> https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/furthering-evolution-centos-stream
>

Even prior to that, it wasn't public. While they have been moving to
gitlab.com/redhat/rhel (which is still private), the RHEL dist-git
exists inside of Red Hat in their Git instance (with multiple
frontends).

Nobody seriously believed that git.centos.org was a place to develop
RHEL. That always happened elsewhere.

CentOS Stream exists now, but actual development is split between
RHEL-internal and CS-public depending on what is being worked on. To
their credit, Red Hat does a lot of work to keep RHEL-internal and
CS-public in sync. The main reason things go out of sync between
RHEL9-devel and CS9-public usually relates to some kind of embargo,
and those are eventually reconciled.



-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Colin Walters wrote:
> Also of salient note, to the best of my knowledge the dist-git equivalent
> for Amazon Linux's isn't public.

Neither is the one for RHEL.
https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/furthering-evolution-centos-stream

Kevin Kofler
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Adam Williamson wrote:
> Sure, it's not a problem *yet*. Microsoft is only just starting to
> crank up the enshittification machine...

Also in that vein, forced 2FA with no way to opt out:
https://github.blog/2022-05-04-software-security-starts-with-the-developer-securing-developer-accounts-with-2fa/

Kevin Kofler
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Gary Buhrmaster]

On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 8:23 PM Neal Gompa  wrote:

> I will also point out the last time we followed RHEL into something,
> we got the modularity system. That itself is an indicator that
> inverting the relationship for decision-making is a bad idea.


In theory, I like the concept of modularity.  But, as
we all know, theory and practice are not always
the same, and modularity was a bridge too far.

___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Colin Walters]

On Fri, Sep 15, 2023, at 4:12 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 1:28 PM Colin Walters  wrote:
>>
>>
>> My point is only partly about the HTML, but about the ecosystem surrounding 
>> it (CI is a really big one) but really the total user experience (account 
>> system, uptime, moving issues), etc.
>>
>> The bigger point I want to make here is that one of the roles of Fedora 
>> obviously is to be an upstream for RHEL.  To state the blindingly obvious 
>> thing, RHEL made a decision to centralize on Gitlab.  Having Fedora be on 
>> pagure creates IMO unnecessary friction for me.  I would be quite curious to 
>> get some sort of survey of other engineers for how they feel.  I'm sure 
>> there's some that disagree with me, to be clear - at least one already 
>> responded.
>>
>
> Fedora is also the upstream to Amazon Linux.

Yes, this is a valid point.  However, I think there are - you know - rather a 
*few* notable differences between the two.  Starting with: I am pretty sure 
still today that Red Hat pays for the time of most people who work on the 
existing infrastructure and the server bills, and has done so for the entire 19 
year existence of Fedora.  Also of salient note, to the best of my knowledge 
the dist-git equivalent for Amazon Linux's isn't public.  CentOS Stream is, and 
synergy between the two is exactly what I'm talking about.  We have no idea 
what source control they use for their forks of packages; I somehow doubt it's 
gitlab or pagure, but who knows.  But still your point is valid in that it 
*would* be interesting to know what Amazon Linux folks think.

>  It is (partly/indirectly)
> an upstream to other RPM distributions. If you're implying we (Fedora)
> need to follow what our downstreams do for development; 

I think using absolute terminology (here, "need") is setting up a strawman.  I 
personally think of things much more in terms of "centers of gravity", that 
influence each other.  I'm saying that the influence and needs of those of us 
who must use gitlab.com/redhat to succeed at our jobs should matter a not small 
amount.

Also to be very clear - I consistently use my personal email for FOSS 
interactions; I'm not speaking for "Red Hat" as any kind of whole.  I am 
expressing my personal, day to day annoyance at having to use 3 different git 
forges to succeed at my job (all at the same company!), and it would be a 
notable improve to go down to two.  (But again again, I am *sure* there are 
those who disagree with me too!  Would love to maybe do a survey)

But, eh.  We could just leave this as the status quo; we all have other 
problems to solve too.
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Neal Gompa]

On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 1:28 PM Colin Walters  wrote:
>
>
> My point is only partly about the HTML, but about the ecosystem surrounding 
> it (CI is a really big one) but really the total user experience (account 
> system, uptime, moving issues), etc.
>
> The bigger point I want to make here is that one of the roles of Fedora 
> obviously is to be an upstream for RHEL.  To state the blindingly obvious 
> thing, RHEL made a decision to centralize on Gitlab.  Having Fedora be on 
> pagure creates IMO unnecessary friction for me.  I would be quite curious to 
> get some sort of survey of other engineers for how they feel.  I'm sure 
> there's some that disagree with me, to be clear - at least one already 
> responded.
>

Fedora is also the upstream to Amazon Linux. It is (partly/indirectly)
an upstream to other RPM distributions. If you're implying we (Fedora)
need to follow what our downstreams do for development; process; and
infrastructure decisions, then there's going to be a problem because
RHEL is not the only one, nor is it even the most used one.

I will also point out the last time we followed RHEL into something,
we got the modularity system. That itself is an indicator that
inverting the relationship for decision-making is a bad idea.

Simply put, that is *not* how the relationship works when we want it
to work well.






--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Colin Walters]

One thing I find amusing about this list (which like some others is kind of a 
long-running soap opera that happens to sometimes produce software as a side 
effect) is that many times, I can see just two bits of information:

- The subject of the email
- The name of the person responding

And I basically *know* what they're going to say.  

Maybe one morning I'll be drinking my coffee, reading a thread like this that 
has "issues.redhat.com" in the Subject and see e.g. Kevin Kofler reply, open up 
the email and he'll say actually something like "JIRA is so awesome!  I love 
the query language!"¹ and I'll just spew coffee all over my keyboard laughing 
in surprise.  We could all chose to reply to threads we ordinarily wouldn't, in 
a different way - just to, you know, spice things up a bit.  Keep the 
viewers^Hreaders entertained.

(This is a point about the list overall and this thread somewhat specificially, 
but only partially your reply; I was *pretty sure* since you replied you'd be 
disagreeing.  But honestly that's *mainly* because email doesn't have "thumbs 
up" style emoji reactions that would be useful in scenarios like this.  Because 
sending an email that just says "+1" or "I agree" is a lot of noise/overhead...)

On Thu, Sep 14, 2023, at 8:50 AM, Fabio Valentini wrote:

> Switch GitLab and Pagure in that statement and I could say the exact same 
> thing.

My point is only partly about the HTML, but about the ecosystem surrounding it 
(CI is a really big one) but really the total user experience (account system, 
uptime, moving issues), etc.

The bigger point I want to make here is that one of the roles of Fedora 
obviously is to be an upstream for RHEL.  To state the blindingly obvious 
thing, RHEL made a decision to centralize on Gitlab.  Having Fedora be on 
pagure creates IMO unnecessary friction for me.  I would be quite curious to 
get some sort of survey of other engineers for how they feel.  I'm sure there's 
some that disagree with me, to be clear - at least one already responded.

¹ To be clear, I am also not a JIRA fan, but that's a mostly orthogonal 
debate...
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Leigh Scott]

Use whatever you like as I wont be migrating to the new infra!
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Cristian Le via devel]

It might also be worth mentioning that both gitea and forgejo support 
Github Actions [1][2]. I did not personally test them, but it might be 
good for the familiarity and reuse of the maintained Github Actions 
library. One missing thing are Github applications, but I don't think we 
are using something currently with Pagure right?


[1] https://docs.gitea.com/usage/actions/comparison
[2] https://forgejo.org/docs/latest/user/actions/

On 2023/09/15 12:06, Dan Čermák wrote:

Ondřej Budai  writes:


What about hosted Gitea from gitea.com?

Gitea is fully open source, very popular in the self-hosting community and
their hosted offering would free up some of our precious infra team
resources.

Gitea is ok from a UX perspective but it is still quite lacking from an
integration point of view. Also, I have found it's API to have a few odd
quirks after working with it for quite some time at $dayjob. Maybe it'll
get there in another year or two, if it gets at least *some* corporate
backing.


Cheers,

Dan
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Dan Čermák]

Ondřej Budai  writes:

> What about hosted Gitea from gitea.com?
>
> Gitea is fully open source, very popular in the self-hosting community and
> their hosted offering would free up some of our precious infra team
> resources.

Gitea is ok from a UX perspective but it is still quite lacking from an
integration point of view. Also, I have found it's API to have a few odd
quirks after working with it for quite some time at $dayjob. Maybe it'll
get there in another year or two, if it gets at least *some* corporate
backing.


Cheers,

Dan
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Clement Verna]

On Fri, 15 Sept 2023 at 11:37, Leon Fauster via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:

> Am 15.09.23 um 07:43 schrieb Clement Verna:
>
> > At the risk of being controversial and a voice of the minority, I think
> > using GitHub would be beneficial for the Fedora project. In practice
> > already most of packagers have to use GitHub to collaborate with
> > upstream so it wouldn't  be a tool to learn. But where, GitHub would be
> > really beneficial IMO is for making our work more visible and reachable
> > to attract new contributors. It is also worth to mention that other
> > distros close to Fedora like Alma Linux or Rocky Linux are using GitHub
> > for their development and it doesn't seems to be a problem.
> >
> IIRC, github just get copies of the self-hosted git-instances that are
> based on gitea (https://git.almalinux.org/) or gitlab
> (https://git.rockylinux.org/) ...
>

Ha thanks, that's interesting. I look at both project web page and just saw
the links to GitHub.


>
> --
> Leon
> ___
> 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
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Leon Fauster via devel]

Am 15.09.23 um 07:43 schrieb Clement Verna:

At the risk of being controversial and a voice of the minority, I think 
using GitHub would be beneficial for the Fedora project. In practice 
already most of packagers have to use GitHub to collaborate with 
upstream so it wouldn't  be a tool to learn. But where, GitHub would be 
really beneficial IMO is for making our work more visible and reachable 
to attract new contributors. It is also worth to mention that other 
distros close to Fedora like Alma Linux or Rocky Linux are using GitHub 
for their development and it doesn't seems to be a problem.


IIRC, github just get copies of the self-hosted git-instances that are 
based on gitea (https://git.almalinux.org/) or gitlab 
(https://git.rockylinux.org/) ...


--
Leon
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Ondřej Budai]

What about hosted Gitea from gitea.com?

Gitea is fully open source, very popular in the self-hosting community and
their hosted offering would free up some of our precious infra team
resources.

Ondřej

Dne st 13. 9. 2023 19:45 uživatel Matthew Miller 
napsal:

> On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 09:20:09AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > IIRC it was a condition of that proposal that we wind up on a hosted
> > version of the *open source* release of gitlab, which is something we
> > managed to talk gitlab into doing for us. IMBW, though, it was a while
> > ago.
>
> Short version is: yes, we did talk them into that with an informal plan,
> and
> then someone higher up at gitlab pulled the plug on the idea.
>
> At this point, we need to step back and re-evaluate all of our options. I'm
> open to the idea of a revitalized pagure as one of the possibilities, but
> before I'd personally back that, I'd like to see it _really_ revitalized...
> it needs to be more than a heroic effort by a few people. Otherwise, we'll
> be back in the same place in few years.
>
>
> --
> Matthew Miller
> 
> Fedora Project Leader
> ___
> 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
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Panu Matilainen]

On 9/14/23 15:50, Fabio Valentini wrote:

On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 2:42 PM Colin Walters  wrote:


On Wed, Sep 13, 2023, at 1:44 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:

On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 09:20:09AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:

IIRC it was a condition of that proposal that we wind up on a hosted
version of the *open source* release of gitlab, which is something we
managed to talk gitlab into doing for us. IMBW, though, it was a while
ago.


Short version is: yes, we did talk them into that with an informal plan, and
then someone higher up at gitlab pulled the plug on the idea.


FWIW I interact with pagure rarely enough that it is somewhat painful to 
context switch each time.  I accept having to deal with both github and gitlab, 
but going from 2 to 3 has a real cost, particularly around things like CI 
systems.


Switch GitLab and Pagure in that statement and I could say the exact same thing.

Personally, I find the Pagure UI (and GitHub) to be much cleaner and
easier to navigate than the UX mess that is GitLab ...
I even find fully FOSS alternatives like Forgejo (Codeberg) *much*
easier to use than GitLab.


Truly.

GitLab used to be quite nice, back in the day. Nowadays I find it 
impossible to navigate. Pagure has its oddities and I never been at home 
there, but it is indeed the (considerably) lesser evil now. And pine for 
Codeberg (which I use for my personal projects).


- Panu -
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Adam Williamson]

On Fri, 2023-09-15 at 07:43 +0200, Clement Verna wrote:
> At the risk of being controversial and a voice of the minority, I think
> using GitHub would be beneficial for the Fedora project. In practice
> already most of packagers have to use GitHub to collaborate with upstream
> so it wouldn't  be a tool to learn. But where, GitHub would be really
> beneficial IMO is for making our work more visible and reachable to attract
> new contributors. It is also worth to mention that other distros close to
> Fedora like Alma Linux or Rocky Linux are using GitHub for their
> development and it doesn't seems to be a problem.

Sure, it's not a problem *yet*. Microsoft is only just starting to
crank up the enshittification machine...

https://www.theregister.com/2023/09/13/github_alienates_customers_by_force/
-- 
Adam Williamson (he/him/his)
Fedora QA
Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @ad...@fosstodon.org
https://www.happyassassin.net



___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Clement Verna]

OOn Thu, 14 Sept 2023, 18:01 Adam Williamson, 
wrote:

> On Thu, 2023-09-14 at 14:50 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 2:42 PM Colin Walters 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 13, 2023, at 1:44 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 09:20:09AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > > > IIRC it was a condition of that proposal that we wind up on a
> hosted
> > > > > version of the *open source* release of gitlab, which is something
> we
> > > > > managed to talk gitlab into doing for us. IMBW, though, it was a
> while
> > > > > ago.
> > > >
> > > > Short version is: yes, we did talk them into that with an informal
> plan, and
> > > > then someone higher up at gitlab pulled the plug on the idea.
> > >
> > > FWIW I interact with pagure rarely enough that it is somewhat painful
> to context switch each time.  I accept having to deal with both github and
> gitlab, but going from 2 to 3 has a real cost, particularly around things
> like CI systems.
> >
> > Switch GitLab and Pagure in that statement and I could say the exact
> same thing.
> >
> > Personally, I find the Pagure UI (and GitHub) to be much cleaner and
> > easier to navigate than the UX mess that is GitLab ...
> > I even find fully FOSS alternatives like Forgejo (Codeberg) *much*
> > easier to use than GitLab.
>
> UI is one thing, but Colin's not wrong about CI.
>
> Love Github or hate it, Github Actions is a pretty strong CI
> implementation that is very easy to set up. I haven't personally set up
> CI for a Gitlab repo yet, but I believe it's also relatively simple
> there.
>

At the risk of being controversial and a voice of the minority, I think
using GitHub would be beneficial for the Fedora project. In practice
already most of packagers have to use GitHub to collaborate with upstream
so it wouldn't  be a tool to learn. But where, GitHub would be really
beneficial IMO is for making our work more visible and reachable to attract
new contributors. It is also worth to mention that other distros close to
Fedora like Alma Linux or Rocky Linux are using GitHub for their
development and it doesn't seems to be a problem.


> Doing it for a non-dist-git Pagure project is not *terrible*, but it
> involves a lot more finicky steps than doing it on Github, including
> waiting for someone to merge a pull request you have to file halfway
> through:
>
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Zuul-based-ci#How_to_attach_a_Pagure_repository_on_Zuul
>
> and you don't have access to something like the Github Actions library
> of setup steps to configure your environment. It would be a significant
> enhancement to Pagure if this experience could be made smoother for
> non-dist-git projects.
>
> On the whole, I do mostly like Pagure's UI too, but it is missing some
> capabilities compared to much more deeply-funded projects (not a
> surprise).
> --
> Adam Williamson (he/him/his)
> Fedora QA
> Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @ad...@fosstodon.org
> https://www.happyassassin.net
>
>
>
> ___
> 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
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Adam Williamson]

On Thu, 2023-09-14 at 14:50 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 2:42 PM Colin Walters  wrote:
> > 
> > On Wed, Sep 13, 2023, at 1:44 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 09:20:09AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > > IIRC it was a condition of that proposal that we wind up on a hosted
> > > > version of the *open source* release of gitlab, which is something we
> > > > managed to talk gitlab into doing for us. IMBW, though, it was a while
> > > > ago.
> > > 
> > > Short version is: yes, we did talk them into that with an informal plan, 
> > > and
> > > then someone higher up at gitlab pulled the plug on the idea.
> > 
> > FWIW I interact with pagure rarely enough that it is somewhat painful to 
> > context switch each time.  I accept having to deal with both github and 
> > gitlab, but going from 2 to 3 has a real cost, particularly around things 
> > like CI systems.
> 
> Switch GitLab and Pagure in that statement and I could say the exact same 
> thing.
> 
> Personally, I find the Pagure UI (and GitHub) to be much cleaner and
> easier to navigate than the UX mess that is GitLab ...
> I even find fully FOSS alternatives like Forgejo (Codeberg) *much*
> easier to use than GitLab.

UI is one thing, but Colin's not wrong about CI.

Love Github or hate it, Github Actions is a pretty strong CI
implementation that is very easy to set up. I haven't personally set up
CI for a Gitlab repo yet, but I believe it's also relatively simple
there.

Doing it for a non-dist-git Pagure project is not *terrible*, but it
involves a lot more finicky steps than doing it on Github, including
waiting for someone to merge a pull request you have to file halfway
through:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Zuul-based-ci#How_to_attach_a_Pagure_repository_on_Zuul

and you don't have access to something like the Github Actions library
of setup steps to configure your environment. It would be a significant
enhancement to Pagure if this experience could be made smoother for
non-dist-git projects.

On the whole, I do mostly like Pagure's UI too, but it is missing some
capabilities compared to much more deeply-funded projects (not a
surprise).
-- 
Adam Williamson (he/him/his)
Fedora QA
Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @ad...@fosstodon.org
https://www.happyassassin.net



___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Christopher Klooz]

It used to be different, but since GitLab changed their UI, I also would 
no longer choose it over alternatives (so, unfortunately: +1 for the UX 
mess & the preference for alternatives). The remaining advantage of 
GitLab is the time-effective drag/drop issue board, but that cannot 
balance the remaining mess... However, pagure has imho its own UX mess 
at some places, depending on what it is used for (while GitHub does not 
follow security best-practices in some respects)... My personal 
preference are gitea-based services, such as codeberg or so.


On 9/14/23 15:43, Peter Boy wrote:



Am 14.09.2023 um 14:50 schrieb Fabio Valentini :

Personally, I find the Pagure UI (and GitHub) to be much cleaner and
easier to navigate than the UX mess that is GitLab …

+++1





--
Peter Boy
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pboy
p...@fedoraproject.org

Timezone: CET (UTC+1) / CEST /UTC+2)

Fedora Server Edition Working Group member
Fedora Docs team contributor and board member
Java developer and enthusiast


___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[mkolman]

On Thu, 2023-09-14 at 14:50 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 2:42 PM Colin Walters 
> wrote:
> > 
> > On Wed, Sep 13, 2023, at 1:44 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 09:20:09AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > > IIRC it was a condition of that proposal that we wind up on a
> > > > hosted
> > > > version of the *open source* release of gitlab, which is
> > > > something we
> > > > managed to talk gitlab into doing for us. IMBW, though, it was
> > > > a while
> > > > ago.
> > > 
> > > Short version is: yes, we did talk them into that with an
> > > informal plan, and
> > > then someone higher up at gitlab pulled the plug on the idea.
> > 
> > FWIW I interact with pagure rarely enough that it is somewhat
> > painful to context switch each time.  I accept having to deal with
> > both github and gitlab, but going from 2 to 3 has a real cost,
> > particularly around things like CI systems.
> 
> Switch GitLab and Pagure in that statement and I could say the exact
> same thing.
> 
> Personally, I find the Pagure UI (and GitHub) to be much cleaner and
> easier to navigate than the UX mess that is GitLab ...
> I even find fully FOSS alternatives like Forgejo (Codeberg) *much*
> easier to use than GitLab.
Agreed, IMHO UI wise:

GitHub >= Pagure > GitLab

> 
> Fabio
> ___
> 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
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Peter Boy]

> Am 14.09.2023 um 14:50 schrieb Fabio Valentini :
> 
> Personally, I find the Pagure UI (and GitHub) to be much cleaner and
> easier to navigate than the UX mess that is GitLab …

+++1





--
Peter Boy
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pboy
p...@fedoraproject.org

Timezone: CET (UTC+1) / CEST /UTC+2)

Fedora Server Edition Working Group member
Fedora Docs team contributor and board member
Java developer and enthusiast


___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Fabio Valentini]

On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 2:42 PM Colin Walters  wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2023, at 1:44 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 09:20:09AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> >> IIRC it was a condition of that proposal that we wind up on a hosted
> >> version of the *open source* release of gitlab, which is something we
> >> managed to talk gitlab into doing for us. IMBW, though, it was a while
> >> ago.
> >
> > Short version is: yes, we did talk them into that with an informal plan, and
> > then someone higher up at gitlab pulled the plug on the idea.
>
> FWIW I interact with pagure rarely enough that it is somewhat painful to 
> context switch each time.  I accept having to deal with both github and 
> gitlab, but going from 2 to 3 has a real cost, particularly around things 
> like CI systems.

Switch GitLab and Pagure in that statement and I could say the exact same thing.

Personally, I find the Pagure UI (and GitHub) to be much cleaner and
easier to navigate than the UX mess that is GitLab ...
I even find fully FOSS alternatives like Forgejo (Codeberg) *much*
easier to use than GitLab.

Fabio
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Colin Walters]

On Wed, Sep 13, 2023, at 1:44 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 09:20:09AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> IIRC it was a condition of that proposal that we wind up on a hosted
>> version of the *open source* release of gitlab, which is something we
>> managed to talk gitlab into doing for us. IMBW, though, it was a while
>> ago.
>
> Short version is: yes, we did talk them into that with an informal plan, and
> then someone higher up at gitlab pulled the plug on the idea.

FWIW I interact with pagure rarely enough that it is somewhat painful to 
context switch each time.  I accept having to deal with both github and gitlab, 
but going from 2 to 3 has a real cost, particularly around things like CI 
systems.
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Neal Gompa]

On Wed, Sep 13, 2023 at 1:45 PM Matthew Miller  wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 09:20:09AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > IIRC it was a condition of that proposal that we wind up on a hosted
> > version of the *open source* release of gitlab, which is something we
> > managed to talk gitlab into doing for us. IMBW, though, it was a while
> > ago.
>
> Short version is: yes, we did talk them into that with an informal plan, and
> then someone higher up at gitlab pulled the plug on the idea.
>
> At this point, we need to step back and re-evaluate all of our options. I'm
> open to the idea of a revitalized pagure as one of the possibilities, but
> before I'd personally back that, I'd like to see it _really_ revitalized...
> it needs to be more than a heroic effort by a few people. Otherwise, we'll
> be back in the same place in few years.
>

It's slow-going, but the community building is happening again. It's
going to be a lot easier to push that further along once the cleanups
that Dominik and I have planned are done and 6.0 is out.



-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Matthew Miller]

On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 09:20:09AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> IIRC it was a condition of that proposal that we wind up on a hosted
> version of the *open source* release of gitlab, which is something we
> managed to talk gitlab into doing for us. IMBW, though, it was a while
> ago.

Short version is: yes, we did talk them into that with an informal plan, and
then someone higher up at gitlab pulled the plug on the idea.

At this point, we need to step back and re-evaluate all of our options. I'm
open to the idea of a revitalized pagure as one of the possibilities, but
before I'd personally back that, I'd like to see it _really_ revitalized...
it needs to be more than a heroic effort by a few people. Otherwise, we'll
be back in the same place in few years.


-- 
Matthew Miller

Fedora Project Leader
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Gary Buhrmaster]

On Wed, Sep 13, 2023 at 3:27 AM Kevin Kofler via devel
 wrote:
>
> Adam Williamson wrote:
> > IIRC it was a condition of that proposal that we wind up on a hosted
> > version of the *open source* release of gitlab
>
> "hosted version" and "open source" is already a contradiction by itself.
> https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/network-services-arent-free-or-nonfree.html
>
> The Fedora Project's increasing reliance on third-party SaaS is a problem,
> not a solution. Even if the server software happens to be FOSS, that is of
> no help if you do not control the server and hence cannot control what
> version is deployed.

As (I think it was Ben who reminded us), the Fedora Council adopted
(in 2018) the following statement:

"The Fedora Project wants to advance free and open source software and
as a pragmatic matter we recognize that some infrastructure needs may
be best served by using closed source or non-free tools today.
Therefore the Council is willing to accept closed source or non-free
tools in Fedora’s infrastructure where free and open source tools are
not viable or not available."

If you don't agree with that decision, run for the council, or
vote for representatives on the council who agree with your
point of view and will work to rescind that statement.

Until that happens, the statement stands as adopted.
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Adam Williamson wrote:
> IIRC it was a condition of that proposal that we wind up on a hosted
> version of the *open source* release of gitlab

"hosted version" and "open source" is already a contradiction by itself.
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/network-services-arent-free-or-nonfree.html

The Fedora Project's increasing reliance on third-party SaaS is a problem, 
not a solution. Even if the server software happens to be FOSS, that is of 
no help if you do not control the server and hence cannot control what 
version is deployed.

Kevin Kofler
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Solomon Peachy via devel]

On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 09:26:44AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> I think we need to figure out the way forward, but... I don't think we
> should do it here and now. Please go test f39. ;) 

While I'm personally glad that the forced-onto-proprietary-gitlab 
migration has effectively stalled indefinitely, the fact remains is 
said migration is still the plan of record.

So, if it's effectively dead, let's make it official?

 - Solomon
-- 
Solomon Peachypizza at shaftnet dot org (email)
  @pizza:shaftnet dot org   (matrix)
Dowling Park, FL  speachy (libera.chat)


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Peter Boy]

> Am 11.09.2023 um 18:14 schrieb Neal Gompa :
> 
> What it did do was make my life harder trying to build up and sustain
> the pagure contributor community.
> 
> Thankfully, pagure development *isn't* dead and after the mailman
> stack stuff is sorted out, I can go back to working on Pagure 6.0.


Maybe a bit OT: I like that and  I am very glad to hear that (the continuous 
development of pagure, not the harder life). Pagure is very efficient and 
straightforward to use. And at least for what I do for Fedora, it is (almost) 
perfect and Gitlab a pain the … 

I’m not a python developer, but maybe I can help otherwise (testing, 
documentation,…)



--
Peter Boy
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pboy
p...@fedoraproject.org

Timezone: CET (UTC+1) / CEST /UTC+2)

Fedora Server Edition Working Group member
Fedora Docs team contributor and board member
Java developer and enthusiast


___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 11:43:55AM -0400, Solomon Peachy via devel wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 07:58:03AM -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> > No? All of our packages are on https://src.fedoraproject.org/ and our
> > Fedora-specific source code goes on https://pagure.io/. These are both
> > Pagure, not GitLab. It is open source.
> 
>   https://lwn.net/Articles/817426/
>   https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/making-a-git-forge-decision/
> 
>  "After evaluating over 300 user stories from multiple stakeholders, the 
>  Community Platform Engineering (CPE) team have aligned on a decision for 
>  the git forge that CPE will operate for the coming years. We are opting 
>  for GitLab for our dist git and project hosting and will continue to run 
>  pagure.io with community assistance."
> 
> That was back in 2020.  Clearly this hasn't happened yet, but there's 
> been almost no communication about the status of this migration since 
> then.  The way it was presented was that this was already a done deal, 
> and we could either accept it or GTFO.

Well, here's my understanding of things.

That decision was made, but then when discussing with gitlab and
doublechecking all requirements, we couldn't get something that met all
the requirements we had.

disclaimer: I was not involved in these talks, nor do I have exact
details.

I think we need to figure out the way forward, but... I don't think we
should do it here and now. Please go test f39. ;) 

kevin


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Adam Williamson]

On Mon, 2023-09-11 at 11:43 -0400, Solomon Peachy via devel wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 07:58:03AM -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> > No? All of our packages are on https://src.fedoraproject.org/ and our
> > Fedora-specific source code goes on https://pagure.io/. These are both
> > Pagure, not GitLab. It is open source.
> 
>   https://lwn.net/Articles/817426/
>   https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/making-a-git-forge-decision/
> 
>  "After evaluating over 300 user stories from multiple stakeholders, the 
>  Community Platform Engineering (CPE) team have aligned on a decision for 
>  the git forge that CPE will operate for the coming years. We are opting 
>  for GitLab for our dist git and project hosting and will continue to run 
>  pagure.io with community assistance."
> 
> That was back in 2020.  Clearly this hasn't happened yet, but there's 
> been almost no communication about the status of this migration since 
> then.  The way it was presented was that this was already a done deal, 
> and we could either accept it or GTFO.

IIRC it was a condition of that proposal that we wind up on a hosted
version of the *open source* release of gitlab, which is something we
managed to talk gitlab into doing for us. IMBW, though, it was a while
ago.

The status of that plan has been kinda up in the air for a while, AIUI.
For a while it was an ENOTIME thing, then there was talk about getting
around to actually doing it, then at Flock I heard rumours that
somebody's interested in picking up Pagure maintenance again,
so...*shrug emoji*
-- 
Adam Williamson (he/him/his)
Fedora QA
Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @ad...@fosstodon.org
https://www.happyassassin.net



___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Neal Gompa]

On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 11:44 AM Solomon Peachy via devel
 wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 07:58:03AM -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> > No? All of our packages are on https://src.fedoraproject.org/ and our
> > Fedora-specific source code goes on https://pagure.io/. These are both
> > Pagure, not GitLab. It is open source.
>
>   https://lwn.net/Articles/817426/
>   https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/making-a-git-forge-decision/
>
>  "After evaluating over 300 user stories from multiple stakeholders, the
>  Community Platform Engineering (CPE) team have aligned on a decision for
>  the git forge that CPE will operate for the coming years. We are opting
>  for GitLab for our dist git and project hosting and will continue to run
>  pagure.io with community assistance."
>
> That was back in 2020.  Clearly this hasn't happened yet, but there's
> been almost no communication about the status of this migration since
> then.  The way it was presented was that this was already a done deal,
> and we could either accept it or GTFO.
>

That was a sham decision process and the resulting thread from that
demonstrated that in spades. It almost entirely failed to consider
what Fedora needed, does, and how the project currently works.

What it did do was make my life harder trying to build up and sustain
the pagure contributor community.

Thankfully, pagure development *isn't* dead and after the mailman
stack stuff is sorted out, I can go back to working on Pagure 6.0.



-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Solomon Peachy via devel]

On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 07:58:03AM -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> No? All of our packages are on https://src.fedoraproject.org/ and our
> Fedora-specific source code goes on https://pagure.io/. These are both
> Pagure, not GitLab. It is open source.

  https://lwn.net/Articles/817426/
  https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/making-a-git-forge-decision/

 "After evaluating over 300 user stories from multiple stakeholders, the 
 Community Platform Engineering (CPE) team have aligned on a decision for 
 the git forge that CPE will operate for the coming years. We are opting 
 for GitLab for our dist git and project hosting and will continue to run 
 pagure.io with community assistance."

That was back in 2020.  Clearly this hasn't happened yet, but there's 
been almost no communication about the status of this migration since 
then.  The way it was presented was that this was already a done deal, 
and we could either accept it or GTFO.

 - Solomon
-- 
Solomon Peachypizza at shaftnet dot org (email)
  @pizza:shaftnet dot org   (matrix)
Dowling Park, FL  speachy (libera.chat)


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Michael Catanzaro]

On Mon, Sep 11 2023 at 08:00:29 AM -0400, Solomon Peachy via devel 
 wrote:

Not to retread old drama, but doesn't Fedora now rely on a proprietary
version of Gitlab?


No? All of our packages are on https://src.fedoraproject.org/ and our 
Fedora-specific source code goes on https://pagure.io/. These are both 
Pagure, not GitLab. It is open source.


I think we *should* move to GitLab, but only if it's an open source 
GitLab instance like most other major open source projects use (GNOME, 
KDE, freedesktop.org, Debian, etc.) We should not depend on proprietary 
services to build Fedora unless there is no suitable alternative, and 
there are *many* suitable alternatives here. This is core to Fedora's 
mission and identity. It wouldn't be strategic to compromise on this.


Michael

___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Solomon Peachy via devel]

On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 04:35:50AM +0200, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> +1, Fedora MUST NOT rely on proprietary infrastructure. IMHO, it is a 
> mistake that Red Hat is doing so, and Fedora should not follow that 
> unfortunate move.

Not to retread old drama, but doesn't Fedora now rely on a proprietary 
version of Gitlab?

 - Solomon
-- 
Solomon Peachypizza at shaftnet dot org (email)
  @pizza:shaftnet dot org   (matrix)
Dowling Park, FL  speachy (libera.chat)


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Adam Williamson wrote:
> I think this would be a non-starter as Jira is not F/OSS. Fedora infra
> must be F/OSS by policy.

+1, Fedora MUST NOT rely on proprietary infrastructure. IMHO, it is a 
mistake that Red Hat is doing so, and Fedora should not follow that 
unfortunate move.

Kevin Kofler
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Brendan Conoboy]

On Sat, Sep 9, 2023 at 4:25 AM Michael J Gruber 
wrote:

> > 3. Issues.redhat.com account basics -
> https://access.redhat.com/articles/7032570
>
> I might have overlooked this, but my impression is:
> - migration created jira accounts automatically
> - they are not necessarily connected to your RH account (or whatever
> it is called what you use for RHEL devel licenses)
> - Reconneting things does not seem to be covered in that article
>
> Michael (or is it mjg? mjg_fedoraproject? michaeljgruber? ...?)


I would use the email address associated with your account.  Like most
systems, there is a "forgot your password?" link.  If you have multiple
accounts (a common situation) you can mail rh-issues at redhat dot com for
help.

-- 
Brendan Conoboy / CASE & CPE / Red Hat, Inc.
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Josh Boyer]

On Sat, Sep 9, 2023 at 4:17 AM Sandro  wrote:
>
> On 09-09-2023 05:33, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 8, 2023 at 7:34 PM Maxwell G  wrote:
> >
> >> 2023-09-09T01:05:39Z Brendan Conoboy :
> >>
> >>> All new issues found or desired in RHEL (Or CentOS Stream) need to be
> >>> filed on issues.redhat.com[http://issues.redhat.com].
> >> Hi Brendan,
> >>
> >> Thanks for the update.
> >>
> >> How can I watch (i.e. get email notifications about) specific packages'
> >> bugs in Jira like I could with
> >> ? I
> >> currently watch ansible-core bugs so I can keep up with RHEL changes and
> >> properly maintain the ansible community package in EPEL.
> >>
> >
> > Hey, this is a great question, especially because I have a decent answer
> > ;-)  I don't think there is an exact analogue, but this approach will
> > probably do what you want, and maybe be even better:
> >
> > 0. I'm assuming you've created an account and are logged in.
> > 1. Visit issues.redhat.com, open the Issues drop-down menu, and select
> > Search.
> > 2. Enter this search term: "project = RHEL and component = ansible-core"
> > and click "Search". You'll see all current issues.  This is called a filter
> > and it works approximately like an SQL query. It's fast.
> > 3. Click the "Save as" button just above the dialogue box. This will let
> > you save the filter for later use, sharing, etc. Let's say you call it
> > "epel ansible-core bugs"
> > 4. Return to the Issues drop-down menu and select "Manage Filters". You'll
> > be taken to a page that shows all the filters you own, probably just "epel
> > ansible-core bugs" to start.
> > 5. On the row showing "epel ansible-core bugs" you'll see a column with a
> > link titled "Subscribe".  Pick the frequency you'd like to have it run, and
> > you'll get an email with the results of the filter on that frequency.
> > 6. Soon you'll get tired of seeing the same stuff, and want to change the
> > filter to something like "project = RHEL and component = ansible-core and
> > (createdDate > -1d OR updatedDate > -1d)".  You can do that, save it to the
> > same filter, and you'll get that report instead.
> >
> > There's a ton of documentation, youtube videos, etc out there on Jira
> > intrinsics like this.  If we find that there's a need for some
> > Fedora-flavored documentation to support EPEL that's cool, let's figure out
> > where to put it and we'll make it happen.
>
> I think you just made perfectly clear why Jira is a beast [1] not aimed
> at usability. I hope Red Hat will heed the feedback of their customers
> once that beast is unleashed upon them.

Customers are directed to the Customer Portal for defects, issues, and
support help in general.

josh

> For context: Years ago I had to manage a stack of Atlassian tools, with
> Jira being one of them. We came from Bugzilla. I hated it ever since.
> Adding insult to injury: the development process didn't improve. Yes
> managers were able to produce nice graphics, but developers in that
> company were still the same old Java boneheads. It's true what they say
> about old dogs.
>
> Since there are now two issue trackers on the redhat.com domain
> (bugzilla.rh.c and issues.rh.c), would it be an idea to migrate
> bugzilla.rh.c to bugzilla.fp.o (or better bugs.fp.o)?
>
> [1] At least Atlassian sort of admit it by choosing the name Jira:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zilla_(Godzilla)
>
> -- Sandro
> ___
> 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
> Do not reply to spam, report it: 
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Albert Stone]

On 09 Sep 2023 01:14, Joe Doss wrote:
> On 9/9/23 1:27 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> On Sat, 2023-09-09 at 04:17 +, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
>>> On Sat, Sep 9, 2023 at 1:05 AM Brendan Conoboy  wrote:
>>>
 RHEL making this change does not imply or require that Fedora do the
 same.
>>>
>>> I am neither suggesting Fedora should do so, or
>>> not do so, but just as a hypothetical, should Fedora
>>> choose to do so, do you know if RedHat would be
>>> amenable for such use of issues.redhat.com for
>>> Fedora bug tracking(*).
>>
>> I think this would be a non-starter as Jira is not F/OSS. Fedora infra
>> must be F/OSS by policy.
> 
> Obligatory uhh not JIRA comment. (sorry, kinda)
> 
> Joe
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Ciao,
al
--
Al Stone
E-mail: a...@ahs3.net
--
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Brendan Conoboy]

On Sat, Sep 9, 2023 at 1:17 AM Sandro  wrote:
[snip]

> Since there are now two issue trackers on the redhat.com domain
> (bugzilla.rh.c and issues.rh.c), would it be an idea to migrate
> bugzilla.rh.c to bugzilla.fp.o (or better bugs.fp.o)?
>

There's something like 150 different product queues on b.r.c- 6 are Fedora,
and we disabled new issue creation in ~4 RHEL queues.  While not all 140
are active, the majority that are might not be a good fit for the Fedora's
mission.  I would also be concerned about putting more load on CPE since
they are not today responsible for Bugzilla.

-- 
Brendan Conoboy / CASE & CPE / Red Hat, Inc.
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Michael J Gruber]

Am Sa., 9. Sept. 2023 um 03:05 Uhr schrieb Brendan Conoboy :
>
> Hi folks,
>
> In March of this year, Josh Boyer sent out a message to Fedora's devel list 
> letting everybody know RHEL was going to move from bugzilla.redhat.com to 
> issues.redhat.com (Jira) in the future [1].  The work on this activity has 
> proceeded with relative quiet since, although a couple weeks ago Florian 
> mentioned on centos-devel that Platform Tools had begun to move [2].  I'm now 
> providing a more official followup:
>
> All new issues found or desired in RHEL (Or CentOS Stream) need to be filed 
> on issues.redhat.com.  It's no longer possible to create new BZs for current 
> RHEL (7 through 9) releases.  Over the next few weeks, most RHEL BZs will be 
> migrated to tickets in the RHEL project on issues.redhat.com.  The BZs that 
> are migrated will be closed with resolution MIGRATED and a pointer to the 
> Jira issue included in the external links section of each respective BZ.  
> Issues that don't get migrated may still be worked on in Bugzilla- only new 
> BZ creation is disabled, and only disabled in RHEL products.  Like before, 
> most new RHEL issues are publicly visible by default, without any login 
> required to view.
>
> RHEL making this change does not imply or require that Fedora do the same.  
> Rather, I'm mentioning this here because many community members who 
> contribute to Fedora via Bugzilla also do the same for RHEL and we appreciate 
> those contributions.  People are welcome to create an account on 
> issues.redhat.com, just like was done on bugzilla.redhat.com previously, see 
> what we're up to, file issues, and contribute there as well.  We've created a 
> hopefully-helpful article with account basics to get your account setup [3].
>
> I've sent a similar message to centos-devel, so apologies if you're reading 
> this a second time.
>
> References:
> 1. Initial Announcement - 
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/U7TZRWXVUGBCHS6EBJIBSFAVPFUHHV7J/
> 2. Migration Starting - 
> https://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2023-August/143056.html
> 3. Issues.redhat.com account basics - 
> https://access.redhat.com/articles/7032570

I might have overlooked this, but my impression is:
- migration created jira accounts automatically
- they are not necessarily connected to your RH account (or whatever
it is called what you use for RHEL devel licenses)
- Reconneting things does not seem to be covered in that article

Michael (or is it mjg? mjg_fedoraproject? michaeljgruber? ...?)
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Sandro]

On 09-09-2023 05:33, Brendan Conoboy wrote:

On Fri, Sep 8, 2023 at 7:34 PM Maxwell G  wrote:


2023-09-09T01:05:39Z Brendan Conoboy :


All new issues found or desired in RHEL (Or CentOS Stream) need to be
filed on issues.redhat.com[http://issues.redhat.com].

Hi Brendan,

Thanks for the update.

How can I watch (i.e. get email notifications about) specific packages'
bugs in Jira like I could with
? I
currently watch ansible-core bugs so I can keep up with RHEL changes and
properly maintain the ansible community package in EPEL.



Hey, this is a great question, especially because I have a decent answer
;-)  I don't think there is an exact analogue, but this approach will
probably do what you want, and maybe be even better:

0. I'm assuming you've created an account and are logged in.
1. Visit issues.redhat.com, open the Issues drop-down menu, and select
Search.
2. Enter this search term: "project = RHEL and component = ansible-core"
and click "Search". You'll see all current issues.  This is called a filter
and it works approximately like an SQL query. It's fast.
3. Click the "Save as" button just above the dialogue box. This will let
you save the filter for later use, sharing, etc. Let's say you call it
"epel ansible-core bugs"
4. Return to the Issues drop-down menu and select "Manage Filters". You'll
be taken to a page that shows all the filters you own, probably just "epel
ansible-core bugs" to start.
5. On the row showing "epel ansible-core bugs" you'll see a column with a
link titled "Subscribe".  Pick the frequency you'd like to have it run, and
you'll get an email with the results of the filter on that frequency.
6. Soon you'll get tired of seeing the same stuff, and want to change the
filter to something like "project = RHEL and component = ansible-core and
(createdDate > -1d OR updatedDate > -1d)".  You can do that, save it to the
same filter, and you'll get that report instead.

There's a ton of documentation, youtube videos, etc out there on Jira
intrinsics like this.  If we find that there's a need for some
Fedora-flavored documentation to support EPEL that's cool, let's figure out
where to put it and we'll make it happen.


I think you just made perfectly clear why Jira is a beast [1] not aimed 
at usability. I hope Red Hat will heed the feedback of their customers 
once that beast is unleashed upon them.


For context: Years ago I had to manage a stack of Atlassian tools, with 
Jira being one of them. We came from Bugzilla. I hated it ever since. 
Adding insult to injury: the development process didn't improve. Yes 
managers were able to produce nice graphics, but developers in that 
company were still the same old Java boneheads. It's true what they say 
about old dogs.


Since there are now two issue trackers on the redhat.com domain 
(bugzilla.rh.c and issues.rh.c), would it be an idea to migrate 
bugzilla.rh.c to bugzilla.fp.o (or better bugs.fp.o)?


[1] At least Atlassian sort of admit it by choosing the name Jira: 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zilla_(Godzilla)


-- Sandro
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Joe Doss]

On 9/9/23 1:27 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:

On Sat, 2023-09-09 at 04:17 +, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:

On Sat, Sep 9, 2023 at 1:05 AM Brendan Conoboy  wrote:


RHEL making this change does not imply or require that Fedora do the same.


I am neither suggesting Fedora should do so, or
not do so, but just as a hypothetical, should Fedora
choose to do so, do you know if RedHat would be
amenable for such use of issues.redhat.com for
Fedora bug tracking(*).


I think this would be a non-starter as Jira is not F/OSS. Fedora infra
must be F/OSS by policy.


Obligatory uhh not JIRA comment. (sorry, kinda)

Joe



--
Joe Doss
j...@solidadmin.com
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Brendan Conoboy]

On Fri, Sep 8, 2023 at 9:18 PM Gary Buhrmaster 
wrote:

> On Sat, Sep 9, 2023 at 1:05 AM Brendan Conoboy  wrote:
>
> > RHEL making this change does not imply or require that Fedora do the
> same.
>
> I am neither suggesting Fedora should do so, or
> not do so, but just as a hypothetical, should Fedora
> choose to do so, do you know if RedHat would be
> amenable for such use of issues.redhat.com for
> Fedora bug tracking(*).
>

We would have to do some scoping and planning and such, but overall I
believe we would support it.  This is one of those abundance of caution
areas where we (Red Hat) want to be especially mindful of project
autonomy.  As was mentioned back in March, our Jira instance has been
supporting other Red Hat umbrella communities, most notably JBoss, since
JBoss joined Red Hat (What was that, 16 years ago?), so there is plenty of
precedent.

My concern is that especially for packages that end
> up being both in Fedora, and in EPEL (of which I
> have a few) there are occasionally tightly related
> RHEL issues, and the advantages of having "one
> pane of glass" to follow the dependencies has
> had some advantages for me personally.
>

It is nice to have everything in one tool and to have one tool that does
the things you need done.

(*) I am not a strong fan of jira, but neither am I
> a strong fan of bugzilla.  Both have certain
> goodness, and badness, and ugliness.  But
> they both mostly work.


Yes, as issue trackers with few functional requirements beyond reliable
uptime they both do the job.

-- 
Brendan Conoboy / CASE & CPE / Red Hat, Inc.
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Adam Williamson]

On Sat, 2023-09-09 at 04:17 +, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 9, 2023 at 1:05 AM Brendan Conoboy  wrote:
> 
> > RHEL making this change does not imply or require that Fedora do the same.
> 
> I am neither suggesting Fedora should do so, or
> not do so, but just as a hypothetical, should Fedora
> choose to do so, do you know if RedHat would be
> amenable for such use of issues.redhat.com for
> Fedora bug tracking(*).

I think this would be a non-starter as Jira is not F/OSS. Fedora infra
must be F/OSS by policy.
-- 
Adam Williamson (he/him/his)
Fedora QA
Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @ad...@fosstodon.org
https://www.happyassassin.net



___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Gary Buhrmaster]

On Sat, Sep 9, 2023 at 1:05 AM Brendan Conoboy  wrote:

> RHEL making this change does not imply or require that Fedora do the same.

I am neither suggesting Fedora should do so, or
not do so, but just as a hypothetical, should Fedora
choose to do so, do you know if RedHat would be
amenable for such use of issues.redhat.com for
Fedora bug tracking(*).

My concern is that especially for packages that end
up being both in Fedora, and in EPEL (of which I
have a few) there are occasionally tightly related
RHEL issues, and the advantages of having "one
pane of glass" to follow the dependencies has
had some advantages for me personally.




(*) I am not a strong fan of jira, but neither am I
a strong fan of bugzilla.  Both have certain
goodness, and badness, and ugliness.  But
they both mostly work.
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Brendan Conoboy]

On Fri, Sep 8, 2023 at 7:34 PM Maxwell G  wrote:

> 2023-09-09T01:05:39Z Brendan Conoboy :
>
> > All new issues found or desired in RHEL (Or CentOS Stream) need to be
> > filed on issues.redhat.com[http://issues.redhat.com].
> Hi Brendan,
>
> Thanks for the update.
>
> How can I watch (i.e. get email notifications about) specific packages'
> bugs in Jira like I could with
> ? I
> currently watch ansible-core bugs so I can keep up with RHEL changes and
> properly maintain the ansible community package in EPEL.
>

Hey, this is a great question, especially because I have a decent answer
;-)  I don't think there is an exact analogue, but this approach will
probably do what you want, and maybe be even better:

0. I'm assuming you've created an account and are logged in.
1. Visit issues.redhat.com, open the Issues drop-down menu, and select
Search.
2. Enter this search term: "project = RHEL and component = ansible-core"
and click "Search". You'll see all current issues.  This is called a filter
and it works approximately like an SQL query. It's fast.
3. Click the "Save as" button just above the dialogue box. This will let
you save the filter for later use, sharing, etc. Let's say you call it
"epel ansible-core bugs"
4. Return to the Issues drop-down menu and select "Manage Filters". You'll
be taken to a page that shows all the filters you own, probably just "epel
ansible-core bugs" to start.
5. On the row showing "epel ansible-core bugs" you'll see a column with a
link titled "Subscribe".  Pick the frequency you'd like to have it run, and
you'll get an email with the results of the filter on that frequency.
6. Soon you'll get tired of seeing the same stuff, and want to change the
filter to something like "project = RHEL and component = ansible-core and
(createdDate > -1d OR updatedDate > -1d)".  You can do that, save it to the
same filter, and you'll get that report instead.

There's a ton of documentation, youtube videos, etc out there on Jira
intrinsics like this.  If we find that there's a need for some
Fedora-flavored documentation to support EPEL that's cool, let's figure out
where to put it and we'll make it happen.

-- 
Brendan Conoboy / CASE & CPE / Red Hat, Inc.
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Maxwell G]

2023-09-09T01:05:39Z Brendan Conoboy :

All new issues found or desired in RHEL (Or CentOS Stream) need to be 
filed on issues.redhat.com[http://issues.redhat.com].

Hi Brendan,

Thanks for the update.

How can I watch (i.e. get email notifications about) specific packages' 
bugs in Jira like I could with 
? I 
currently watch ansible-core bugs so I can keep up with RHEL changes and 
properly maintain the ansible community package in EPEL.


Thanks again,
Maxwell
--
Maxwell G (@gotmax23)
Pronouns: He/They
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Brendan Conoboy]

Hi folks,

In March of this year, Josh Boyer sent out a message to Fedora's devel list
letting everybody know RHEL was going to move from bugzilla.redhat.com to
issues.redhat.com (Jira) in the future [1].  The work on this activity
has proceeded with relative quiet since, although a couple weeks ago
Florian mentioned on centos-devel that Platform Tools had begun to move
[2].  I'm now providing a more official followup:

All new issues found or desired in RHEL (Or CentOS Stream) need to be filed
on issues.redhat.com.  It's no longer possible to create new BZs for
current RHEL (7 through 9) releases.  Over the next few weeks, most RHEL
BZs will be migrated to tickets in the RHEL project on issues.redhat.com.
The BZs that are migrated will be closed with resolution MIGRATED and a
pointer to the Jira issue included in the external links section of each
respective BZ.  Issues that don't get migrated may still be worked on in
Bugzilla- only new BZ creation is disabled, and only disabled in RHEL
products.  Like before, most new RHEL issues are publicly visible by
default, without any login required to view.

RHEL making this change does not imply or require that Fedora do the same.
Rather, I'm mentioning this here because many community members who
contribute to Fedora via Bugzilla also do the same for RHEL and we
appreciate those contributions.  People are welcome to create an account on
issues.redhat.com, just like was done on bugzilla.redhat.com previously,
see what we're up to, file issues, and contribute there as well.  We've
created a hopefully-helpful article with account basics to get your account
setup [3].

I've sent a similar message to centos-devel, so apologies if you're reading
this a second time.

References:
1. Initial Announcement -
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/U7TZRWXVUGBCHS6EBJIBSFAVPFUHHV7J/
2. Migration Starting -
https://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2023-August/143056.html
3. Issues.redhat.com account basics -
https://access.redhat.com/articles/7032570

-- 
Brendan Conoboy / CASE & CPE / Red Hat, Inc.
___
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue