On Mon, 2021-05-10 at 15:18 -0400, Rich Bowen wrote:
If you have been involved in any of our SIGs, now or in the past - or, indeed, if you'd like to be in the future - I'd like to hear from you.
I was going to do a formal survey, but I find I need a baseline - I don't even know what questions to ask.
I'd like to hear what you love and what you hate about the SIG process. What you would like to see done differently. What features/services you'd like to see added, and which we could drop.
The main issues I've hit so far are things around the developer experience on git.centos.org and CBS. Notably: - the lack of a working PR workflow: https://pagure.io/centos-infra/issue/228 - the way the lookaside works: https://pagure.io/centos-infra/issue/259 - hard to discover clone URLs: https://pagure.io/centos-infra/issue/245 - support for modularity in CBS: https://pagure.io/centos-infra/issue/294
None of these are showstoppers, but they are definitely roadblocks. The PR workflow in particular is problematic -- right now we rely on SIG members pushing directly to the repos, which makes code review difficult. It's also a blocker for external contribution (as, though one can technically put up a PR, there is no way to actually merge it). I would love to have something closer to the workflow in Fedora here, specifically: - allow SIG members to review and merge PRs onto their branch - kick off scratch builds on PRs to get signal
The other thing I would love is a way for SIGs to publish structured documentation on docs.centos.org, akin to the "quick docs" model that Fedora uses.
Cheers Davide