On Wed, Apr 13, 2016, at 05:50 AM, Farkas Levente wrote: > hi, > i see that the atomic devel list is very active many people working on > many things and probably there are some clear directions and goals, but > it's not really clear for outsiders. imho it'd be very useful to clarify > a few things:
Your questions are very valid, thanks for bringing this up! > - is the atomic project (mainly the centos part) is independent of > redhat atomic or it's just a rebuild of redhat atomic (similar to > redhat->centos). There are two aspects to CentOS, and indeed this is very confusing. See: https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup The "CentOS Core" is purely a rebuild from source of upstream binaries. Whereas the other SIGs take arbitrary different code on top, newer versions of things, etc. > - or atomic (centos) is the test bed for atomic redhat? I wouldn't say "the" test bed, but certainly several groups in Project Atomic provide deliverables in CentOS - the ADB team for example. I would like to more consistently do both CentOS Atomic SIG *and* Fedora. > - is there any roadmap or clear priorities, planed deadlines etc? We still have improvements to make here, I'll put it that way. > - is there any plan to dockerize those components which currently run on > the host (eg. kubernetes, etcd)? Yes. See previous discussion on this list. > - what about the openshift components? will them added to atomic project > or not? For upstream OpenShift Origin, there is indeed a containerized version available, and I certainly believe myself that supporting OpenShift should be a priority for Project Atomic, if not the #1 priority. > - what about flannel? it'd be dockerized or replaced by openvswitch > which is used by openshift? I'm not a networking person, but ideally one of them would respond here... > - what's the plane to include newer cockpit in atomic host? afais > cockpit 100 (even 101) released but the 2 days old atomic host update > only contains version 0.93 from january. I am actively working on addressing part of this problem with the more consistent CentOS Atomic SIG builds. > - who is in charge? i see on the list Josh, Colin, Daniel, Joe and many > others are working on many different things but can't find anywhere any > plan or design docs or something. This partially devolves to the upstream of the individual projects, but this list should be used for inter-project coordination.
