On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 2:11 PM, Kamil Paral <kpa...@redhat.com> wrote:
> > I don't have any serious issues, as long as we only use pagure as git
> host. I
> > hate that "we wanted to copy github, but stopped just after we found out
> > it's too much functionality" thing (also don't like how github works on
> > of that, so even a 1:1 clone would be awful from my perspective).
> Just a remark, Pagure development hasn't stopped, it constantly receives
> new functionality . But I agree it's not likely to be that featureful as
> github any time soon, and I'd be wary if we wanted to move our whole
> workflow there (i.e. ditching Phabricator). For just hosting git repos,
> it's of course absolutely fine. We'll need to discuss whether we want to
> keep the issues/pull requests open there to receive some simple
> reports/patches (and ask people to move more complex ones to Phab), or
> whether we'll not use that in Pagure at all. (Let's not forget we also have
> libtaskotron in Bugzilla, fortunately it's not used much yet).
> I am personaly against issues/pull requests on Pagure - logging into Phab
is about as difficult as logging into Pagure, and I don't see the benefit
of "allowing people to do it, since it's possible" even balancing out the
problem of split environments.
But that's just me.
qa-devel mailing list -- firstname.lastname@example.org
To unsubscribe send an email to qa-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org