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 > top > > 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 [1]. 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 -- qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to qa-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
