Hosting and Supporting GIT conversion of Fedora CVS to enabledownstream development efforts and distributions

[Manas Saksena]

On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 10:15 -0800, seth vidal wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 09:21 -0800, Manas Saksena wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I would like to request support for hosting git conversion of Fedora
> CVS
> > as per Lennert's post to fedora-infrastructure-list.
> >
> >
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-infrastructure-list/2007-November/msg00136.html
> >
> > While there were a few responses to the mail (both support and
> > skepticism) there was no clear decision.
> >
> > The basic idea of this effort is to enable downstream development
> > efforts that make use of the fedora package repository as their
> upstream
> > source.
> >
> > The specific efforts that I am interested are:
> >
> > 1. Building small footprint systems (for embedded systems use).
> > 2. Cross-building (a subset of) Fedora packages.
> > 3. Support for architectures and platforms that are not (yet)
> integrated
> >    into the Fedora project. 
> > 4. Building a GNOME Mobile distribution.
> >
> > etc. Others may find it useful for other purposes.
> >
> > The git tree does not have to be hosted in the fedora
> infrastructure,
> > but it seems like the natural place for it to be. It also sends the
> > message that the Fedora project encourages downstream efforts that
> can
> > leverage Fedora into areas that are not of direct/current interest
> for
> > the project.
> >
> > So, in summary, I would appreciate if the Fedora board can consider
> this
> > request and provide clear guidance on whether this activity
> can/should
> > be supported through the fedora infrastructure.
> 
> I'm not positive but this doesn't seem like a board decision. If the
> releng, fesco and infrastructure teams are at an impasse we can take
> it
> up for discussion but I don't see a reason to not let those groups do
> what they're supposed to do.
> 
One of the stated goals of Fedora is to support downstream activities
and distributions like I mentioned. The proposal here was for a
relatively small investment on the part of the Fedora project towards
support of that goal. 

However, I guess the decision from the infrastructure team (presumably
as a follow-up to the email here) is clear -- that this is an activity
that the team views as a diversion, and should be supported outside the
fedora infrastructure.

Thanks for your time.  

Regards, 
Manas