[fab] project hosting?

[Bill Nottingham]

Rex Dieter (rdieter at math.unl.edu) said: 
> Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > Rahul Sundaram (sundaram at fedoraproject.org) said: 
> >> It is far from clear to me why Fedora needs to provide its own
> >> infrastructure for itself rather than just use something like Savannah.
> > 
> > Integrating the translation project into Savannah seems like
> > it would be hard, if not impossible.
> 
> How so?

Just bringing in 1000 users who all need access to specific subsets
of 100 packages; it's possible, I suppose. Seems like a large
maintenance issue that we could solve better if we at least controlled
the backend.

There's also the current infrastructure that allows translators
to 'reserve' files for a period of time. I'm not sure how that
would work at all.

> In a similar vein, we should probably come up with a list of
> requirements, if we have any hope of properly evaluating project hosting
> alternatives.

Okily dokily.

1) Various and sundry SCM (currently used: CVS, hg, git)
   - ACLs
   - notification of commits, per module and general
   - pre-commit sanity checks (translation validity, etc.)
2) Ability to release & host tarballs
3) Some sort of basic web space, either via a CMS, or static. vhosting
   could even be nice.
4) mailing lists?
5) bug tracking?
6) Ability to work with our translation infrastructure; currently, this involves:
   - 2113 translator accounts (admittedly, not all active)
   - 173 locales (admittedly, not all active)
   - Ability for translators to reserve files
   - Ability to set up per-language translator team mailing lists that span
     projects
   - Ability to restrict translators to a specific subset of a project's files,
     not maintained per-project
   - (wishlist) ability to not have to maintain a @&$& modules file by hand to
     get stuff to translators :)
   - (wishlist) web download/upload/commit mechanisms?
   - reports!

That's off the top of my head.

Bill