Cristian Le wrote: > On May 8, 2026 8:01:55 PM GMT+02:00, Maxwell G [email protected] wrote: > > > > The CI situation is still not resolved. It seems Forgejo Actions are > > currently available on a by-request basis, but resources are limited and > > only unprivileged containers are available which is not suitable for > > projects that currently rely on Zuul + Testing Farm to run tests in VMs. I > > was under the impression that Packit + Testing Farm was supposed to be the > > replacement for Zuul here but was told by the Packit team that implementing > > support for Forgejo and Fedora Forge is not a current priority. > > > > About the currently available tools: > - Forgejo actions: good for simple CI that would run on a container. You can > request beefier machines [1], but that will take some time > - Testing-farm action [2]: an intermediate solution until packit is > available. In principle you should have arbitrary environment, but I am > investigating why it is not working in [3] (ETA, early next week). This does > not have an integration with copr, but it could be added if the copr build is > handled somewhere else in the forgejo action > Packit + testing-farm would still be preferred [2], and afaict it is 1 PR > away [4] from at least having the endpoint and start iterating on it. > There will be some infra and CI gather before Flock, and there might be yet > another workflow to consider there and/or at Flock, so stay tuned for that. > But until then, cc me if you need help with the testing-farm action workflow > or find any issues. > [1]: https://forge.fedoraproject.org/forge/forge/issues/564 > [2]: https://forge.fedoraproject.org/ci/testing-farm > [3]: https://forge.fedoraproject.org/atomic-desktops/config/pulls/757 > [4]: https://github.com/packit/packit-service/pull/2852
Hi all, Some context on where Packit stands with Forgejo support. The team is focused on the dist-git use case right now (autumn 2026 timeline). There's overlap with upstream Forge CI, but enough differences (events, config, notifications) that we can't do both with current capacity. I know people need this for migrations now, but I hope community might help here. OGR (our git-forge abstraction layer) already supports Forgejo since February. The main remaining work is service-level event processing and integration. We have a PR (packit-service#2852) from last year's GSOC that demonstrated Packit running on a Forgejo instance (Codeberg): https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/?p=14804&preview=1&_ppp=5f3b0f0ca3 That said, most Forge use cases are test-only and don't need the RPM handling Packit specialises in. A lightweight solution with Testing Farm integration might actually be a better fit than Packit service support. I'd like to cleanup our GitHub issue tracker and clearly document what's still missing to make it contributable. Happy to provide guidance if people want to work on this. This is the issue to follow: https://github.com/packit/packit-service/issues/2855 (AI/agentic contributions are fine — just make sure what you submit is worth the review time.) Let me know if you want to be involved in any way. I'd rather be straight about our situation than promise something we can't finish. František -- _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] 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/[email protected] Do not reply to spam, report it: https://forge.fedoraproject.org/infra/tickets/issues/new
