> On Jul 25, 2019, at 2:32 PM, Fox, Kevin M <kevin....@pnnl.gov> wrote: > > While "just works" is a great goal, and its relatively easy to accomplish in > the nice, virtualized world of vm's, I've found it is often not the case in > the dirty realm of real physical hardware. Sometimes you must rebuild/replace > a kernel or add a kernel module to get things to actually work. If you don't > support that, Its going to be a problem for many a site.
Ok, so this would be the “I want to be able to run my own kernel” use case. That’s definitely something I would expect to be available with OKD in the existing proposal, you would just be providing a different ostree image at install time. How often does this happen with fedora today? I don’t hear it brought up often so I may just be oblivious to something folks deal with more. Certainly fcos should work everywhere existing fedora works, but if a substantial set of people want that flexibility it’s a great data point. > > Thanks, > Kevin > ________________________________________ > From: dev-boun...@lists.openshift.redhat.com > [dev-boun...@lists.openshift.redhat.com] on behalf of Josh Berkus > [jber...@redhat.com] > Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2019 11:23 AM > To: Clayton Coleman; Aleksandar Lazic > Cc: users; dev > Subject: Re: Follow up on OKD 4 > >> On 7/25/19 6:51 AM, Clayton Coleman wrote: >> 1. Openshift 4 isn’t flexible in the ways people want (Ie you want to >> add an rpm to the OS to get a kernel module, or you want to ship a >> complex set of config and managing things with mcd looks too hard) >> 2. You want to build and maintain these things yourself, so the “just >> works” mindset doesn’t appeal. > > FWIW, 2.5 years ago when we were exploring having a specific > Atomic+Openshift distro for Kubernetes, we did a straw poll of Fedora > Cloud users. We found that 2/3 of respondees wanted a complete package > (that is, OKD+Atomic) that installed and "just worked" out of the box, > and far fewer folks wanted to hack their own. We never had such a > release due to insufficient engineering resources (and getting stuck > behind the complete rewrite of the Fedora build pipelines), but that was > the original goal. > > Things may have changed in the interim, but I think that a broad user > survey would still find a strong audience for a "just works" distro in > Fedora. > > -- > -- > Josh Berkus > Kubernetes Community > Red Hat OSAS > > _______________________________________________ > dev mailing list > dev@lists.openshift.redhat.com > http://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshiftmm/listinfo/dev _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@lists.openshift.redhat.com http://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshiftmm/listinfo/dev
