Fedora and PDC

Good Morning Everyone, We have been informed thst week at the upstream devs working on the product-definition-center (PDC) are moving away from the project and are going to leave it without a maintainer. Since we adopted PDC for a variety of data flows, this puts us in an awkward position. :( Ralph and I met up on Tuesday to brainstorm the list of things we actively use PDC for today and to come up with a contingency plan for how to handle them. One overarching option is for us (fedora-infra) to take ownership of the PDC codebase as a whole. We didn't fully explore this option, figuring that the codebase is large and contains lots of tables, endpoints, and codepaths that we didn't use nor which we plan to use. Instead, below we've got the four things we use PDC for and some options for what to do with each. With the exception of /modules/, one common pattern that we like is to investigate splitting out the "django apps" that make up PDC into their own projects. We're calling these "pdc-lite", for fun. See more below. * Modules The data in the /modules/ PDC endpoint is *also* in the MBS db. Ralph's team is going to just use that and stop using pdc anything for modules. We're going to need to patch pungi, mbs for local builds, and a few other places. This should be a relatively low-pain transition. * Stream branches, branch ownership, retirement dates? - SLA/EOL are currently stored in PDC. - Queried by releng scripts for retirement, fedrepo-req for new branches, etc.. option #1 git repo full of yaml file similar to the override repo compiled into a single JSON blob Single place for all retired packages This feels like the lowest tech option. git gives us change control for free... but people easily get lost in the "UX" of navigating a gigantic git repo full of plaintext files. option #2 pagure's DB/API pagure knows nothing about branches currently, so that would be bigger lift option #3 PDC internally is composed of ~20 "django apps" https://github.com/product-definition-center/product-definition-center/tr... We could pick the 2 or 3 that comprise the branches feature, copy them out, and turn them into their own service: the "branch definition center": BDC. That would be the "pdc-lite" approach mentionned above, ie: PDC with only the "app" of interest * release/life-circle tracking? option #1: PDC lite with just that app of interest option #2: JSON/yaml file on the proxies option #3: pkgdb-lite option #4: ??? compose tracking? impacted: fedfind option #1: PDC-lite with just that app of interest option #2: Drop this entirely? Adam probably really wants to keep the record of composes. option #3: ??? The "pdc-lite" options are attractive, across the board. One thing we get from this is greater clarity when discussing things formerly in PDC. If something is in the branch-definition-center, the compose-definition-center, or the release-definition-center.. you know what you're talking about. Today, when talking about whether or not something should be or is in "PDC", it is easy to get confused. I propose we start the discussion on the list and plan for a meeting sometime late next week to discuss it further with the interested parties (please signal yourself) What do you think? Pierre and Ralph