Umm, I maybe on the wrong side of things but can there be a hash
generation api or something for FAS using OAUTH as the base? Its an idea
so that we can collaborate with external applications.
Good idea or bad?
On 21/02/2011 5:40 p.m., Ricky Zhou wrote:
> On 2011-02-21 01:33:01 PM, Ruediger Landmann wrote:
>> This decision has greatly saddened and disappointed me. With all respect
>> to Dmitris and his team, to me, it seems like Fedora is giving up a key
>> part of our infrastructure and our independence.
> First, let me say - I'm happy as long as the work gets done to make
> a Transifex instance usable and maintained for translators.
> But one question - can you quantify exactly what we lose with switching to
> transifex.net? We discussed this in infrastructure, and the conclusion
> was that we only lose FAS auth (and we already spoke to spot about any
> CLA issues, and he said that it shouldn't be an issue). In return, we
> get an actually maintained Transifex instance that won't be (often)
> unusable and slow for translators.
> What independence do we have with running our own instance? We don't
> have the people to maintain/upgrade it, and while we have the freedom to
> make code changes to our instance, we certainly don't have the manpower
> to actually make that happen. On the other hand, Dimitris and other
> Transifex developers have already been willing to put time into helping
> us with our instance, taking bug reports and patches from us, and making
> sure that we have good service on transifex.net.
> The infrastructure team is already really happy not to have to put
> manpower into running bugzilla.redhat.com, and the way I see it, having
> a similar arrangement with transifex.net would be great for everybody.
infrastructure mailing list