On 4/2/20 3:03 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
At the outset of this whole mess, quite a lot of people said "well this
is obviously just all a pretext for dropping Pagure and going to hosted
Gitlab". Much offence seemed to be taken at this, and much was made of
this absolutely not being the case at all, and Pagure being definitely
a contender, and - as was pointed out upthread - how there would be
public meetings and feedback sessions and a whole three-ring circus
before a final decision was made. Which very definitely hadn't already
been made, or anything.
And now three days into this thread, you're saying "well, CPE doesn't
have the resources to maintain Pagure". So, what, people were right in
the first place, and this was really just the Dump Pagure Project all
along?
If so what was the point of all this half-baked kabuki nonsense? Why
not just say so up-front? If CPE never thought it had the resources to
maintain Pagure and Pagure was never really a contender, and Github was
as clearly a non-starter as Leigh says it was, why didn't we just say
"yeah no we're going to Gitlab" four months (or whatever it was) ago
and save all of this silliness? We agree that this process wasn't
actually very open at all, but*even if it had been*, if the result was
preordained, what would have been the point?
I agree with you.
_______________________________________________
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
