FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Advisory Board

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 02-06-2012, 09:35 PM
Miloslav Trmač
 
Default Endorsement of https://github.com/fedoraproject

On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 11:20 PM, Jesse Keating <jkeating@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 2/6/12 8:42 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>>
>> So another question to be considered is whether github provides a
>> service that isn't available from other, open source third-parties.
>
>
> gitorious being the closest open source alternative.

Isn't the point of the requested github account to be able to use
github's integreated pull request features?
Mirek
_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
 
Old 02-06-2012, 09:37 PM
Jesse Keating
 
Default Endorsement of https://github.com/fedoraproject

On 2/6/12 2:30 PM, seth vidal wrote:

On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 14:20:25 -0800
Jesse Keating<jkeating@redhat.com> wrote:


On 2/6/12 8:42 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:

So another question to be considered is whether github provides a
service that isn't available from other, open source third-parties.


gitorious being the closest open source alternative.



What about gitlabhq?


-sv


Looks like it was started in 2011, which was after I did any looking
into this market


--
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
 
Old 02-06-2012, 09:39 PM
Bill Nottingham
 
Default Endorsement of https://github.com/fedoraproject

Jesse Keating (jkeating@redhat.com) said:
> On 2/6/12 2:30 PM, seth vidal wrote:
> >On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 14:20:25 -0800
> >Jesse Keating<jkeating@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> >>On 2/6/12 8:42 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> >>>So another question to be considered is whether github provides a
> >>>service that isn't available from other, open source third-parties.
> >>
> >>gitorious being the closest open source alternative.
> >>
> >
> >What about gitlabhq?
>
> Looks like it was started in 2011, which was after I did any looking
> into this market

I may be blind, but it also doesn't look like gitlabhq is actually offering
hosting/a service - they'll give you the code so you can host your own.

Bill
_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
 
Old 02-06-2012, 09:43 PM
seth vidal
 
Default Endorsement of https://github.com/fedoraproject

On Mon, 6 Feb 2012 17:39:56 -0500
Bill Nottingham <notting@redhat.com> wrote:

> Jesse Keating (jkeating@redhat.com) said:
> > On 2/6/12 2:30 PM, seth vidal wrote:
> > >On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 14:20:25 -0800
> > >Jesse Keating<jkeating@redhat.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >>On 2/6/12 8:42 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> > >>>So another question to be considered is whether github provides a
> > >>>service that isn't available from other, open source
> > >>>third-parties.
> > >>
> > >>gitorious being the closest open source alternative.
> > >>
> > >
> > >What about gitlabhq?
> >
> > Looks like it was started in 2011, which was after I did any looking
> > into this market
>
> I may be blind, but it also doesn't look like gitlabhq is actually
> offering hosting/a service - they'll give you the code so you can
> host your own.
>

correct they don't - however we may have the capacity to host that in
FI.

-sv
_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
 
Old 02-06-2012, 10:05 PM
Dennis Gilmore
 
Default Endorsement of https://github.com/fedoraproject

El Wed, 01 Feb 2012 16:19:08 +0100
Carlo de Wolf <cdewolf@redhat.com> escribió:
> Hello members of the Board,
>
> I would like to petition the Board to endorse
> https://github.com/fedoraproject as a secondary outlet of hosted code.
>
> Some projects that go into Fedora have their upstream hosted on
> GitHub. To get these projects into Fedora not only spec files need to
> be created, in most cases patches need to be created as well. While
> these patches themselves are available in the corresponding rpm git
> repo (pkgs.fedoraproject.org) they are not easily usable for upstream
> developers. (And in most cases "hand"-crafted, instead of maintained
> in a real branch.) An upstream developer is used to work on a git
> branch.
>
> Whilst it is possible to maintain such a git branch at
> fedorahosted.org it would suffer from a lack of integration with the
> upstream branch hosted on GitHub itself.
>
> Note that this petition does not ask for alleviation of hosting on
> fedorahosted.org should that be required. In that case
> https://github.com/fedoraproject would serve as a mirror of
> fedorahosted.org.
>
> I do say that Fedora should endorse and administrate the account
> known as fedoraproject on GitHub for the sole purpose of providing an
> extra outlet of Fedora branches related to GitHub hosted upstream
> projects.
>
> Note that I'm completely ignorant of actual possibilities and I
> hereby apologize for said ignorance.
>
> Thanks in advance,

since github is propietory its not an acceptable option for fedora. so
i think in this case we need to say no. there are plenty of ways that
packagers and developers can work together without the need of this.

Dennis
_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
 
Old 02-06-2012, 11:02 PM
Josh Boyer
 
Default Endorsement of https://github.com/fedoraproject

On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 5:43 PM, seth vidal <skvidal@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Feb 2012 17:39:56 -0500
> Bill Nottingham <notting@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> Jesse Keating (jkeating@redhat.com) said:
>> > On 2/6/12 2:30 PM, seth vidal wrote:
>> > >On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 14:20:25 -0800
>> > >Jesse Keating<jkeating@redhat.com> *wrote:
>> > >
>> > >>On 2/6/12 8:42 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>> > >>>So another question to be considered is whether github provides a
>> > >>>service that isn't available from other, open source
>> > >>>third-parties.
>> > >>
>> > >>gitorious being the closest open source alternative.
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > >What about gitlabhq?
>> >
>> > Looks like it was started in 2011, which was after I did any looking
>> > into this market
>>
>> I may be blind, but it also doesn't look like gitlabhq is actually
>> offering hosting/a service - they'll give you the code so you can
>> host your own.
>>
>
> correct they don't - however we may have the capacity to host that in
> FI.

Argh. Why? We already have fedorahosted.org which hosts git trees.
We also have fedorapeople.org, which can easily host git trees per user.
I don't see the need to host ANOTHER git tree hosting thing at all.

josh
_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
 
Old 02-06-2012, 11:36 PM
seth vidal
 
Default Endorsement of https://github.com/fedoraproject

On Mon, 6 Feb 2012 19:02:17 -0500
Josh Boyer <jwboyer@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 5:43 PM, seth vidal
> <skvidal@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> > On Mon, 6 Feb 2012 17:39:56 -0500
> > Bill Nottingham <notting@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Jesse Keating (jkeating@redhat.com) said:
> >> > On 2/6/12 2:30 PM, seth vidal wrote:
> >> > >On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 14:20:25 -0800
> >> > >Jesse Keating<jkeating@redhat.com> *wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > >>On 2/6/12 8:42 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> >> > >>>So another question to be considered is whether github
> >> > >>>provides a service that isn't available from other, open
> >> > >>>source third-parties.
> >> > >>
> >> > >>gitorious being the closest open source alternative.
> >> > >>
> >> > >
> >> > >What about gitlabhq?
> >> >
> >> > Looks like it was started in 2011, which was after I did any
> >> > looking into this market
> >>
> >> I may be blind, but it also doesn't look like gitlabhq is actually
> >> offering hosting/a service - they'll give you the code so you can
> >> host your own.
> >>
> >
> > correct they don't - however we may have the capacity to host that
> > in FI.
>
> Argh. Why? We already have fedorahosted.org which hosts git trees.
> We also have fedorapeople.org, which can easily host git trees per
> user. I don't see the need to host ANOTHER git tree hosting thing at
> all.
>

I didn't say we WOULD - I just said we might - and one merit of
gitlabhq is just that it is a better interface than trac + gitweb.

-sv
_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
 
Old 02-08-2012, 07:53 PM
Rex Dieter
 
Default Endorsement of https://github.com/fedoraproject

Carlo de Wolf wrote:

> Hello members of the Board,
>
> I would like to petition the Board to endorse
> https://github.com/fedoraproject as a secondary outlet of hosted code.

As a followup, in todays IRC meeting, the board agreed to the proposal:

The Board grants https://github.com/fedora-jboss-as permission to use the
Fedora trademarks on that website for the purpose of getting JBoss-AS
packaged for Fedora.

This allows you to remove the disclaimers on the site, as long as it is used
for the purpose described.

-- rex

_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
 
Old 02-09-2012, 06:39 AM
Mark McLoughlin
 
Default Endorsement of https://github.com/fedoraproject

On Wed, 2012-02-01 at 16:19 +0100, Carlo de Wolf wrote:
> Hello members of the Board,
>
> I would like to petition the Board to endorse
> https://github.com/fedoraproject as a secondary outlet of hosted code.
>
> Some projects that go into Fedora have their upstream hosted on GitHub.
> To get these projects into Fedora not only spec files need to be
> created, in most cases patches need to be created as well. While these
> patches themselves are available in the corresponding rpm git repo
> (pkgs.fedoraproject.org) they are not easily usable for upstream
> developers. (And in most cases "hand"-crafted, instead of maintained in
> a real branch.) An upstream developer is used to work on a git branch.

If I understand you correctly, I think it's very similar to what we're
doing with OpenStack:

https://github.com/organizations/fedora-openstack/

Basically, any patches we have for the packages go into forks of
upstream's github repos. We've got a hacky script to sync patches from
those repos into patch files in pkgs.fp.org repo:

http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/gitweb/?p=openstack-nova.git;a=blob;f=update-patches.sh;h=617221f

We think it's:

a) useful to maintain patches in git, e.g. cherry picking patches from
upstream and

b) make it very easy for upstream and other downstream to see what
patches we're shipping

OpenStack doesn't use github merge props, it uses gerrit instead.

Cheers,
Mark.

_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 12:44 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org