I'm very interested in this. I had a couple chats with Brian Stinson about using GitLab for community-related stuff, possibly under a "Community" namespace. But if we're setting this up based on SIGs, everything I want to do could go under the Promo SIG. -- Shaun On Tue, 2022-02-15 at 16:32 +0100, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > Good Morning Everyone, > > Some people have already noticed some asks being made to the CentOS > infrastructure team and may be wondering what is the end goal of all > of these. > > So this email is to try to share the end goal/vision of what I would > to like to > reach and open it up for comments/thoughts. > > I know of folks wanting to use gitlab for their workflow, this is for > example > the case of the automotive SIG folks. One reason for this is the > automation that > has been developed around the gitlab API in other contexes but that > can be > re-used for the SIG's benefits. So I have been looking at ways to > make it > possible for the Automotive SIG to use gitlab, but also keeping in > mind that > other SIGs may also be interested in re-using that model. > > > First of all, a disclaimer: > *all of the following only applies to SIGs who are interested. It is > entirely > opt-in. There is absolutely no desire to change what is working today > for SIGs > who do not wish to change*. > > > So the way I envision things is the following: > * SIGs who want they will be able to request a namespace at > gitlab.com/centos/<sig_name> > * The SIG chairs will be made owner of that namespace, giving them > full power to > organize it the way they wish > * Guidance will be provided in the SIG's guide as to the different > approaches > possible (from the most simple to more complexes [1]). Those will > be just > that: guidance, SIGs can choose to follow them or ignore them > * Gitlab groups will be mapped to groups in the CentOS accout system > * Upon requests, groups can be created in the CentOS account system - > This will > allow SIG to fine-tune their access control if they so choose > * SIGs will be able to use that gitlab namespace to host the git > component of > their dist-git > * SIGs will be able to use either the flat dist-git layout or the > exploded SRPM > layout in their git repo, at their choosing, regardless of where > they host > their repositories > * The lookaside cache used by the SIGs will be reworked to drop the > requirement > on branch name in the path. The end result will likely look like > the Fedora or > CentOS-Stream's lookaside cache. There are potentially a few ways > to arrive to > this, I have not started any conversation around this > > I have no ETA for most of these items, some are already work in > progress (such > as the possibility to use flat-layout in dist-git [2]), others are > quite far > down the line (cf the point about the lookaside cache). > > What do you all think of these ideas? Is that something that would be > of > interest? Did I miss something? > > If you would like more realtime discussion on this topic, it will be > on the > agenda of the infra SIG at 14 UTC on Monday the 21st in #centos- > meeting. > > > Looking forward to hear your thoughts! > > Pierre > > > > [1] for example: > https://pagure.io/centos-infra/issue/645#comment-779917 > _______________________________________________ > CentOS-devel mailing list > CentOS-devel at centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel >