On 11/04/2014 10:30 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 11/03/2014 04:47 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
Petr Viktorin wrote:

There's been some interest in releasing pieces of FreeIPA's testing
infrastructure so it can be reused in other projects.
I will soon take the pytest-beakerlib plugin (currently in my patch
0672), and making a stand-alone project out of it. Later I'll extract
the common pieces of the integration testing framework, and release that

Do we want projects projects like these to be hosted on Fedorahosted?
That would be the 100% open-source solution.

Or do we want to put it under a freeipa organization on Github, since
we're more likely to get external contributors there?

Why do you think it would get more contributors from github? Because yet
another account isn't required, or the contributor process is perhaps
better understood (via pull requests)?

Both. The community is larger (i.e. contributors are likely to already have an account on Github), and the contribution process is nowadays more familiar to most people.

+1, from my experience with the openstack community, and with redhat - see github.com/redhat-openstack, et. al.

And I'm not talking about a proprietary process here: the pull request process is "publish a Git repo, and nag people to merge from it". It's built into Git itself – see git-request-pull(1). Github makes this easy, and adds a Web UI and some inevitable (but optional) proprietary "perks". But underneath it's still Git and e-mail if you care to use those.


Or both? (Would we want to "officially" mirror the project to Github
from FH?)

I'd be in favor of fedorahosted because you get a tracker and wiki as
well, and having the repo there would round things out.

Yeah, the tracker is a reason for FH. Github does host git-backed wikis using an open-source backend, but it doesn't have an acceptable bug tracker.

What's wrong with the github issue tracker?

Freeipa-devel mailing list

Reply via email to