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 11-28-2007, 05:35 PM
Rahul Sundaram
 
Default Hosting and Supporting GIT conversion of Fedora CVS to enable downstream development efforts and distributions

Jesse Keating wrote:


What are you really looking for the board to say here? "We want it."
Ok, then what? Work still has to get done, and there is still nobody
volunteering to do it.


"We want it" is fine since realistically when you are managing a largely
volunteer group, all that you can do is express is your ideas and
motivations behind it. Board did that last week or so with the request
for a CD set from the next release onwards. We don't have to assume that
nobody would be interested. As Thorsten said in the recent discussions
in fedora-devel list about FESCo, merely expressing the desire can get
others motivated to do it and it is a important thing for us to continue
doing periodically. If people don't, that's ok since we would have a
clear open request for help. This is one of the ways in which higher
level groups can drive the direction of the project.


Rahul

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 11-28-2007, 05:39 PM
Josh Boyer
 
Default Hosting and Supporting GIT conversion of Fedora CVS to enable downstream development efforts and distributions

On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 23:48:04 +0530
Rahul Sundaram <sundaram@fedoraproject.org> wrote:

> Josh Boyer wrote:
> > Frankly, I don't think the Board has any business in this discussion
> > yet. There are known pain points in providing this (and switching SCMs
> > all together), the benefits to Fedora are little to none at the moment,
> > and it can be hosted elsewhere.
>
> As has been indicated before, the board already has a stake in the
> discussion having expressed the desire to see Fedora as a better
> upstream and having initiated the SCM SIG. So it is not really a

The Board didn't start the SCM SIG.

> question of whether they should have a role but whether they should have
> a more active role in the discussions. Apparently the problem is now
> lack of people to do the tasks involved which is ok as long as the
> desire is clearly expressed so others can volunteer if they are interested.

Lack of people is part of the problem. Lack of physical resources is
the other. Hosting this costs real money. The infrastructure team is
already trying to battle some space issues at the moment.

> > Your insistence at having them declare something one way or another
> > seems to be nothing more than whining because you aren't getting your
> > way.
>
> I really have no personal stake on it. So this is a gross mis
> characterization and only distracts us from having a conversation about
> real issues. Please avoid doing so.

It's not a distraction. You're essentially going around the people
that have the most knowledge about the necessities involved by trying
to invoke the Board to tell them how to do their role. If you want to
have a discussion, talk with infrastructure and FESCo. If you want to
recruit people to actually work on this, post it to -devel or
-devel-announce.

At any rate, I'll avoid discussing this with you from now on.

josh

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 11-28-2007, 05:51 PM
Rahul Sundaram
 
Default Hosting and Supporting GIT conversion of Fedora CVS to enable downstream development efforts and distributions

Josh Boyer wrote:

On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 23:48:04 +0530
Rahul Sundaram <sundaram@fedoraproject.org> wrote:


As has been indicated before, the board already has a stake in the
discussion having expressed the desire to see Fedora as a better
upstream and having initiated the SCM SIG. So it is not really a


The Board didn't start the SCM SIG.


I know that. They expressed the desire to see it happen which is exactly
the kind of actions that I am asking for.



Your insistence at having them declare something one way or another
seems to be nothing more than whining because you aren't getting your
way.
I really have no personal stake on it. So this is a gross mis
characterization and only distracts us from having a conversation about
real issues. Please avoid doing so.


It's not a distraction. You're essentially going around the people
that have the most knowledge about the necessities involved by trying
to invoke the Board to tell them how to do their role.


What am I doing is expressing a wish to see this happen and explaining
why I believe it is important that the board take a active role on these
matters as a former member myself. This is neither whining nor
dictating anything. If anybody thinks they have all the knowledge they
ever need to act on these things and aren't open to hearing others
ideas, then I am afraid there is nothing more to discuss.


Rahul

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 11-28-2007, 06:03 PM
Josh Boyer
 
Default Hosting and Supporting GIT conversion of Fedora CVS to enable downstream development efforts and distributions

On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 09:59:28 -0900
"Jeff Spaleta" <jspaleta@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Nov 28, 2007 9:15 AM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Frankly, I don't think the Board has any business in this discussion
> > yet. There are known pain points in providing this (and switching SCMs
> > all together), the benefits to Fedora are little to none at the moment,
> > and it can be hosted elsewhere.
>
> I don't see much here that needs rubber stamping from the board.
> Let me sum up where i think the discussion is at:
>
> 1) A community member has done the necessary work to implement a way to make
> a copy of fedora's cvs and turn it into something git friendly. This
> gives downstream people who are comfortable with git a way a new
> interact with our package sources. This is not a bad thing, and I
> decree that as a board member such initiative should be applauded.
> I'd send him a t-shirt and some stickers, but I don't have any.
>
> 2) This person feels comfortable enough with how its working to want
> to expose this as a public consumable for other people. The question
> is how to best do that.
>
> 3) There are some concerns about doing this as part of infrastructure
> right now. There is some resource duplication here and since git has
> not been selected as the next piece of technology to use its not clear
> that providing git as a fedora services versus some other technology
> is worth the resource burn. If there was a long term directive to
> move to git for Fedora's usage, then there would be a compelling
> reason to burn internal infrastructure resources to duplicate cvs into
> git.
>
> 4) Infrastructure is willing to help make it easier for a community
> hosted solution to get access to cvs for duplication.
>
> Do I have the story so far? If there isn't a cohesive plan to start
> transitioning to git internally over sometime scale, I'm not sure
> exactly what I'm suppose to be supporting. I've got other things I'd
> like to see infrastructure diskspace and human resources used for like
> spin source isos, that I feel are far more critical to provide than a
> duplication of cvs content as a git consumable. I mean I'm not going
> to actively lobby against duplicating git but I've no reason to prefer
> to see resources used for this over other things.

Agreed.

> Here's the reality as I see it. We simply can not do everything as
> part of internal infrastructure. Sometimes this project will need to
> rely on community provided services to extend the projects
> capabilities into new areas. Some of these things will eventually be
> pulled into the project as an internal service based on the success
> and growth of the service while it was being hosted externally. Other
> services won't be for a variety of reasons (though none of the
> efforts should be considered failures even if they are discarded or
> reach a niche audience)

A big +10.

> What the Board needs to figure out is how to make it possible to make
> the Fedora brand a big enough tent to encompass services that are not
> internally hosted, in an equitable manner. Encourage people to host
> community services, give credit where credit is due, and give these
> external community services some credibility as being an outgrowth of
> the project and some recognition as to the effort being made
> regardless as whether the service is adopted/co-opted by the Fedora
> project offically .

Agreed.

josh

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 11-28-2007, 06:20 PM
Rahul Sundaram
 
Default Hosting and Supporting GIT conversion of Fedora CVS to enable downstream development efforts and distributions

Jeff Spaleta wrote:


What the Board needs to figure out is how to make it possible to make
the Fedora brand a big enough tent to encompass services that are not
internally hosted, in an equitable manner.


This involves figuring out which of the community setup services which
the board needs to endorse as part of the Fedora brand and that involves
some amount of rubber stamping IMO. Whether it is setup internally or
hosted externally is really a implementation detail if we all have a
better understanding of the kind of the things the Fedora Board
collectively wants to see happen (ie) vision and that is the
communication and direction that I am really asking for apart from
whatever routine short term management of the project.


Encourage people to host

community services, give credit where credit is due, and give these
external community services some credibility as being an outgrowth of
the project and some recognition as to the effort being made
regardless as whether the service is adopted/co-opted by the Fedora
project officially .


Agreed. As part of these, we should look into the kind of activities
that help the Fedora "ecosystem" and not just the direct benefits for
the project. Linking to Creative Commons from start.fp.o as an example
of what we have already done along those lines.


Rahul


_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 11-28-2007, 07:29 PM
Rahul Sundaram
 
Default Hosting and Supporting GIT conversion of Fedora CVS to enable downstream development efforts and distributions

Jeff Spaleta wrote:


Are you expecting the Board to be able to anticipate all the ways the
community members can be clever? Are you looking for unfunded and
unmanned directives for projects that the Board would like to see
implemented? In this specific case, I certainly never would have
thought of duplicating cvs as git. Shame on me.


Not to such low level details but the kind of audiences we are trying to
serve. If a distributed SCM's help serve one set of audiences better,
that kind of activities needs to be encouraged. You don't have to look
at the specifics too much here. This is just an example.



If we had to host all of Creative Commons internally, we wouldn't be
able to do it. Supporting an externally hosted git duplication of our
cvs is still on the table in the original thread on the infrastructure
list. Are we talking about linking to an externally hosted git
duplication of our cvs?


Correct. Linking is one way to endorse the effort. If we have the
systems but not the people to do the effort, letting people who might be
interested to use our systems to do their thing is another.


Rahul

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 12:12 PM.

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