Note: that's something to take into account in the process with the process of making private repo public

Question: Do we want to have a configuration key to allow or not private repo for the whole instance?

Note: that's something to take into account in the process with the process of making private repo public

This would mean fork of forks if we go with the namespace. @ryanlerch

I think that is a more generic issue that applies to both public and private repos. There should probably be a way to enforce approval for creating new projects for some people. So that some people can be trusted to create projects without approval, some can create them with approval and others cannot create new projects at all.

A sort of related issue is that there should probably be an easy way for a fork to become a new project. Though for now that can be managed by creating a new project and moving over the git repo to get code moved. If you don't care about PRs or issues, then that works without too much effort.

i was in favor of namespace for private repos because it doesn't "feel" like a project for the community (unless it's made public later). Also, initially pagure didn't have namespace because of the idea that a project belongs to the whole community rather than an individual but we are now talking about private repos.

Although, i have not much experience (you can barely call it experience) but the idea of approval for creating a project seems too controlling. If we are going to implement that idea it should definitely be done with a conf key for the pagure instance.

If we have a name space the conversion of private repo into public will be a really big problem. I have a small suggestion why can't we have a conf key having max_private_repo so a specific quota of private repo is given to each user. Which saves the namespace pollution cause and will also be adjustable since it's a conf key setting.

What are we going to do with this ?

@puiterwijk is 100% right about this; just created my first repo and I was dumbfounded that it got immediately dumped into the root namespace. I had to delete the project, figure out that I should first create a "group" equalling my nick (and realize that "group" and "namespace" are the same thing), then re-create the project from zero, but this time under said namespace. Quite non-intuitive coming from github.com -- and I'm setting up this repo exactly to offer my public branches for consumption on a platform that I perceive as more ethical than github.com. IOW, helping users migrate from github.com to pagure.io should be made as seamless as possible.

Thanks; I'll get off my soap box now. :)

Personal namespaces were also requested in https://pagure.io/pagure/issue/1283, should be further discussed and considered for the next major release