Dear Jeff, On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 08:25:47AM -0500, Jeffrey Burke wrote: > On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 3:18 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@redhat.com> wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > >> Excerpts from Amit Saha's message of 2014-08-20 14:04 +10:00: > [...] > > Yep, lets start with some permissive "you can do whatever you want" > > defaults (it's a test harness after all), and if we get requests to be able > > to run tests in a locked down container instead... well, part of the reason > > for giving the default container lots of power is so people can start their > > *own* locked down containers if they want them. If people want the harness > > container to be more configurable, they're gonna have to be *real* > > persuasive in order to successfully argue that starting a second container > > doesn't make more sense :) > > > > Hi All, > I wanted to see if I could revive this thread. It has been several > years now. We still have two harnesses in Beaker. Roman do you have a > roadmap of the Beaker Harness plan. I don't specifically know the contents of that conversation. Perhaps Dan can give me a hint if I'm on a wrong track here.
Our current idea is to make restraint the default harness for RHEL8+ and therefore slowly phase out beah (as the default). That includes getting restraint to achieve feature parity with beah. I don't have an exact time frame for this yet and how we would pull this off, since I expect there are possibly higher priority items coming up. Does that answer your question or at least goes in the right direction? Kind Regards, -- Róman Joost Senior Software Engineer, Products & Technologies Operations (Brisbane) Red Hat
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Beaker-devel mailing list -- email@example.com To unsubscribe send an email to beaker-devel-le...@lists.fedorahosted.org