On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 6:39 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek < zbys...@in.waw.pl> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 11:52:57PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 23.8.2018 22:43, Ben Cotton wrote: > > >Hi community, > > > > > >We've traditionally used the wiki for Change proposals because it's > > >the tool we had. But, it's not necessarily well-suited to the purpose. > > >But now we have Pagure, which can help address some of the > > >shortcomings of using the wiki: poor scriptability, no reporting, and > > >a lot of copy/paste. > > > > Good idea! > > > > >So I've come up with a plan that would use Pagure instead: > > >https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Bcotton/UsePagureForChanges > > > > > 6. FESCo votes on change. > > > > On the Pagure ticket with the change or in a separate FESCo Pagure > ticket? > > I think we should vote in the Change bug. I don't see advantages to > opening a new ticket. > > > >You can read the full details on the wiki page above, but the general > > >idea is that we won't change the policy for Changes, just how we store > > >and manipulate them. My intent is to make it nearly seamless for the > > >community while giving us a platform for building on the process in > > >the future. Note that this would run parallel to Bugzilla for a > > >release or two and then replace Bugzilla for Changes tracking. > > > > The good thing about Bugzilla trackers is that they can be used > > as... Bugzilla trackers. I mean you can block/depend other bugs on > > it. > > > > See for example http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=PYTHON37 > > and the dependent bugs. Of course, this might be relevant to some > > kind of Changes only, so the Bugzilla tracker can be optional, but > > I'd rather keep it as part of the process. > > I think we might want to make it an optional element. If the Change > needs a tracking bug, create it, otherwise not. I think most Changes > don't do any real tracking in bugzilla, except to change the bug as > "done" at some point. > > > One more thing that I didn't see explicitly mentioned in the proposal > is the fact that Change pages are also documentation, fairly widely > accessed, also long after the Change has been implemented. For this, > the fact that the Change page show no context by default is an advantage. > I wonder if we could request an enhancement to pagure to have a view > where just the main text is shown, without the side bar, comments, > headers, etc. > It'd be great if we could end this practice by having our documentation updated as a part of the change. Consumers of our software shouldn't need to know to check what will feel like "random" wiki pages to many of them for more docs. regards, bex > > Also, it should be clarified if Change owners should edit the original > text. > > Zbyszek > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists. > fedoraproject.org/message/VSTCNQXOVJWSOJQBE6CXAIJ3XUMKFVDM/ > -- Brian (bex) Exelbierd | bexel...@redhat.com | b...@pobox.com Fedora Community Action & Impact Coordinator @bexelbie | http://www.winglemeyer.org
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
