Repo Home for Websites and Apps

Hi all,

Just wondering if there has ever been any consensus on where the websites and apps team is going to keep all their source repos? and if websites and apps “owns” a website or app, are we going to try to consolidate it in a central area (pagure group, or github org, or gitlab group)

On the fedora-infra side of things, the repos are split between both github and pagure. All the github repos are in the fedora-infra org, but the pagure ones are spread out a bit more.

I personally don’t have any objections to using tools like github or gitlab – my wish here is that everything would be in the same place, and well organized.

2 Likes

I also have some repos that we will want to probably add to the websites and apps fold – like the mediawiki theme, fedora-bootstrap, etc etc.

I think of creating a namespace at our GitLab, should there not be one in Pagure. We have been working on repositories from under the fedora-infra Github (Fedora Infrastructure · GitHub), fedora-websites (Overview - fedora-websites - Pagure.io), websites (Overview - fedora-web/websites - Pagure.io).

We do have a namespace at Pagure with just one repo under it called sig-webdev (Overview - sig-webdev/home - Pagure.io) but I would state that ours is NOT a SIG but rather a team - with a well-defined purpose, roles, responsibilities, mentorship and council representation.

@ryanlerch, what are the implications of creating one in GitLab?

@misc, @darknao, @jflory7, please fill in if I missed out on something or stated anything incorrect.

I think we have the fedora-web namespace already on pagure.
I’m also in favour of keeping everything in the same namespace even if it’s across different forge (but not to regroup everything in the same repo).

So there is this open ticket too – with the purpose of renaming and moving that SIG group to websites-apps:

https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/9882

But i figured renaming these repos is pretty invasive, so if we want to rename and move them only once (be it to gitlab or pagure or whatever) – lets figure out a strategy for how everything is going to be strucured first :slight_smile:

Not 100% sure of the implications of setting this up in GitLab. Although there are open tickets still for setting up the gitlab instance properly:

For the record too, here is the initial post by @lgriffin about gitlab:

@darknao, I didn’t quite get the “same” namespace across the “different” forges part. Do you mean that you don’t really have an opinion on which forge it is where we have stuff - as long as they are all accumulated under a single namespace?

@ryanlerch, the ticket Issue #9882: [Pagure] [database] Change group name/ID from "WebDev SIG" to "Websites & Apps" - fedora-infrastructure - Pagure.io does have a tinge of unclearness in purpose so I agree to structure things first before finding a place to store our repos. It also makes the renaming task on Pagure inconsequential. The ticket Issue #10313: Fedora Websites Revamp Team is looking for creating projects on GitLab - fedora-infrastructure - Pagure.io which I somehow remember making talks about having a place where the Websites Revamp (the one where @duffy, @pawelzelawski, @ankursinha, @mattdm, @riecatnor, @aday, @bcotton etc. are involved) to fix a planning area for Kanban ops.

We, of course, can use the VERY SAME namespace for housing other repositories of ours but let us be first clear on the fact if we really want to do that or not. We also need the auth on GitLab to be bound with Noggin/IPA first before we could make the move happen.

Yes, I mean we can have one namespace on each forge if you’d like. I don’t think one forge is better than another. They all have their own advantages.
I personally like the review system on Github, but prefer the CI/CD system of gitlab. And Pagure is well integrated with everything Fedora.

1 Like

Very true. ;(

As much as one forge for everything would help us simplify stuff to a greater extent, we would always miss out on something that the other forge provides with and hence, there’s no objective best one to pick here. I personally prefer “one namespace in one forge” over “one namespace over each forge” (each implying multiple forges are in use) due to the simplicity and I like to think that we would be able to take advantage of the CI/CD features of GitLab a lot.

Perhaps for this reason alone, I would be really keen to try out a new team in Fedora’s GitLab namespace. I think we could segment out the websites into smaller, individual repositories too.

Pagure has nice CI for building RPM packages and the like, but testing things like websites is actually really hard to set up. I would really like to see us trial out GitLab and make a unified effort to migrate the existing repos scattered around there. Plus, for the GitHub repos, I think we can import the issue and PR/MR history into GitLab in one click.

THere is a pagure ticket open to create this team:

the current frontrunner for the slug is “websites-apps”

https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/10313