Currently not, basically due to the redirects :)

OK - consider this an RFE. :)

I think we could just set a straightforward redirect policy and this wouldn't be too hard.

1 - we have pagure.io/foo
2 - we rename to pagure.io/bar/foo (under bar group)
3 - all issue/PR references get redirected https://pagure.io/foo/issue/2103 -> https://pagure.io/bar/foo/issue/2103
4 - when someone tries to create a new repo pagure.io/foo explain that pagure.io/bar/foo owns that name and redirects
5 - Allow a setting in pagure.io/bar/foo repo that will allow for the owner to release the lock on pagure.io/foo and thus discontinue redirects

bump - any chance we could get this considered? I'd like to do some restructuring for the atomic repos.

see https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/2ZPZ4Q22Y7GGYOWAPWJSJSXIDHILJXB5/

any chance we could get this considered?

This is not a priority for me, it will come with quite a number of consequences that will need to be dealt with (redirect the UI, redirect the ssh access in gitolite, how to deal with new project wanting to re-use the old, no longer in use, name...) to implement this properly.

If someone wants to tackle this, I'll be happy to review a pull-request, but I won't be working on this any time soon.

Duplicate: https://pagure.io/pagure/issue/3229

Could we get an archived repo flag that closes down the issues, etc. and makes it read-only and pulls it out of searches, etc.? I am putting this here because most of the rename needs I have are to relocate a repo for archive reasons.

hey @pingou - friendly question, is the priority for this still as stated in https://pagure.io/pagure/issue/2103#comment-495760 ?

@dustymabe it's currently not in the roadmap for 5.2.

In early december I hope to start having stakeholder meetings where is discussed the upcoming one or two releases.
If you can make the meeting, it would be a good place to ask for this RFE to be put on the roadmap :)

If you can make the meeting,

I should be able to if I don't miss the notice. I'll try to look out for it.

@pingou Can we get this considered for either 5.5 or 5.6? This was a pain point brought up by Atomic/CoreOS teams as well as the Silverblue team.

Any updates on this?