Add Fedora CI research

Signed-off-by: Matej Focko <[email protected]>

research/integrations/fedora-ci/index.md

@@ -0,0 +1,192 @@
+---
+title: Packit as Fedora dist-git CI
+authors: mfocko
+---
+
+Related links:
+
+- [Epic](https://github.com/packit/packit-service/issues/2453)
+- [Research issue](https://github.com/packit/packit-service/issues/2462)
+
+## Current Fedora CI
+
+1. Koji scratch build
+1. Installability
+1. tmt (if plans are present)
+
+### Zuul as a parallel CI
+
+1. Builts SRPM
+1. Submits Koji scratch build
+1. Runs RPM linter
+1. Runs RPM inspect
+1. Tests install
+1. Runs tmt
+
+## Possible implementation
+
+### SRPM build
+
+Ideally kept identical. Packit should not be involved in any way that can affect
+the results of the SRPM build, i.e., just run `fedpkg srpm` and be done with it.
+
+This can be done within the sandbox as we do for non-scratch builds. However it
+might need some tweaking as Packit has specific worfklow.
+
+### Koji scratch build
+
+We are already submitting scratch builds for merged PRs, if configured. This
+would just extend the functionality to the non-merged PRs (with need to provide
+the SRPM).
+
+### RPM linting, inspect and installability test
+
+There are premade tmt plans that we can run.
+
+:::note Question
+
+Should these be run in parallel or sequentially and fail on first?
+
+:::
+
+### Testing Farm
+
+Different form of request than for upstream jobs.
+
+```json
+{
+  "id": "2fdee1a0-0746-45ad-ad0c-d3ec8833630b",
+  "user_id": "c4af7afe-b95e-4cf1-b989-9c458f0eecf0",
+  "token_id": "c4af7afe-b95e-4cf1-b989-9c458f0eecf0",
+  "test": {
+    "fmf": {
+      "url": "https://src.fedoraproject.org/forks/packit-stg/rpms/packit",
+      "ref": "0d4dfcfcc2a708f06c65b80404cc022e7bf6bead",
+      "merge_sha": null,
+      "path": ".",
+      "name": null,
+      "settings": null,
+      "plan_filter": null,
+      "test_name": null,
+      "test_filter": null
+    },
+    "script": null,
+    "sti": null
+  },
+  "state": "complete",
+  "environments_requested": [
+    {
+      "arch": "x86_64",
+      "os": {
+        "compose": "CentOS-Stream-9"
+      },
+      "pool": null,
+      "variables": {
+        "KOJI_TASK_ID": "123014869"
+      },
+      "secrets": null,
+      "artifacts": [
+        {
+          "id": "123014869",
+          "type": "fedora-koji-build",
+          "packages": null,
+          "install": true,
+          "order": 50
+        }
+      ],
+      "settings": null,
+      "tmt": {
+        "context": {
+          "arch": "x86_64",
+          "distro": "centos-stream-9",
+          "initiator": "fedora-ci",
+          "trigger": "commit"
+        },
+        "environment": null
+      },
+      "hardware": null,
+      "kickstart": null
+    }
+  ],
+  "notes": [
+    {
+      "level": "info",
+      "message": "tf-tmt/dispatch-1725615078-80d05f05"
+    }
+  ],
+  "result": {
+    "summary": null,
+    "overall": "passed",
+    "xunit": "…",
+    "xunit_url": "https://artifacts.dev.testing-farm.io/2fdee1a0-0746-45ad-ad0c-d3ec8833630b/results.xml"
+  },
+  "run": {
+    "console": null,
+    "stages": null,
+    "artifacts": "https://artifacts.dev.testing-farm.io/2fdee1a0-0746-45ad-ad0c-d3ec8833630b"
+  },
+  "settings": null,
+  "user": {
+    "webpage": null
+  },
+  "queued_time": 6.892783,
+  "run_time": 1207.608357,
+  "created": "2024-09-06T09:31:17.471815",
+  "updated": "2024-09-06T09:31:17.471844"
+}
+```
+
+Most notable differences:
+
+- RPMs are provided from Koji scratch build (following Fedora CI, which is
+  easier than self-hosting)
+- chroot is defined by the branch rather than config
+
+## Technical issues / questions
+
+### Load balancing
+
+### SRPM build
+
+For Zuul is run via `fedpkg srpm`. Then it's provided for the Koji build.
+
+Packit should not interefere with the way the SRPM gets built.
+
+### Propagating Koji build
+
+### RPM for Testing Farm
+
+Zuul provides its own (self-hosted) repository. Fedora CI just refers to the
+scratch build.
+
+Self-hosting the repository is not preferred, following the Fedora CI approach
+might be the best.
+
+### STI tests
+
+Older format of tests that can be run via Zuul. Based on the TF API, Testing Farm
+supports it too. Requesting STI tests from the Testing Farm should be possible,
+detection of their presence lies on Packit.
+
+## User perspective
+
+### Fedora
+
+### Fedora SIGs
+
+### CentOS SIGs
+
+## Difficulties depending on the forge
+
+### Pagure
+
+Mainly reliability, it would require retries. Together with normal Packit CI
+workflows, considerable overhead.
+
+### GitLab
+
+#### Upstream vs downstream
+
+### Forgejo
+
+#### ogr