[MCP] - Story 2: Define Deployment Architecture for Fedora Contributors #488

New issue

Open

opened 2026-04-02 08:40:51 +00:00 by humaton · 0 comments

humaton commented

2026-04-02 08:40:51 +00:00

Owner

Summary

The goern/forgejo-mcp server can run in two modes: locally on a contributor's machine (STDIO) or centrally hosted (HTTP/SSE). We need to decide which topology best serves the Fedora community while balancing infrastructure overhead, security, and ease of use.

Details

Tasks

Document the pros and cons of the STDIO approach (zero infrastructure cost, decentralized, but requires packagers to install the binary locally).
Document the pros and cons of the HTTP/SSE approach (centralized, easier client config, but requires Fedora Infra to host, maintain, and secure a new public-facing service).
Draft an Architecture Decision Record (ADR) outlining the recommended approach.
Present the ADR to the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee (FESCo) or the relevant Fedora Infrastructure team for approval.

Acceptance Criteria

Both deployment models are thoroughly evaluated regarding Fedora's security and maintenance standards.
An ADR is submitted, reviewed, and a final decision is recorded.
The Epic is updated to reflect whether we are proceeding with Story 4 (Infrastructure) or skipping directly to Story 5 (Documentation).

### Summary The `goern/forgejo-mcp` server can run in two modes: locally on a contributor's machine (STDIO) or centrally hosted (HTTP/SSE). We need to decide which topology best serves the Fedora community while balancing infrastructure overhead, security, and ease of use. ### Details **Tasks** 1. Document the pros and cons of the STDIO approach (zero infrastructure cost, decentralized, but requires packagers to install the binary locally). 2. Document the pros and cons of the HTTP/SSE approach (centralized, easier client config, but requires Fedora Infra to host, maintain, and secure a new public-facing service). 3. Draft an Architecture Decision Record (ADR) outlining the recommended approach. 4. Present the ADR to the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee (FESCo) or the relevant Fedora Infrastructure team for approval. **Acceptance Criteria** * Both deployment models are thoroughly evaluated regarding Fedora's security and maintenance standards. * An ADR is submitted, reviewed, and a final decision is recorded. * The Epic is updated to reflect whether we are proceeding with Story 4 (Infrastructure) or skipping directly to Story 5 (Documentation).