Hi Kevin! On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 12:41 AM Kevin Fenzi <ke...@scrye.com> wrote:
> > * Other developers: > > Our focus for this change is specifically on Fedora Workstation. > > Nevertheless, we are open to collaborating with all spins/SIG to > > transition their build pipelines to Image Builder. However, for the > > initial switch, we aim to minimize the impact by focusing on a single > > artifact. We anticipate that more artifacts will be transitioned in > > subsequent releases of Fedora Linux. > > I realize you have to start somewhere, but I'm not sure this is > something that should be driven by the SIGs/spin owners. I mean if the > images produced are the same, why do they care? :) > We are happy to drive this. We just don't want to do any changes without them. :) > > Would it be better to start with a non blocking deliverable and get > things working, then just switch all the rest? > It's important to understand how we got here: We are collaborating with the installer team on the new Web UI - e.g. we provided the tooling for building the preview images <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Anaconda_Web_UI_preview_image> last cycle, helping with setting up image builder upstream for their CI and we did some debugging. Thus, it makes sense for us to focus on the same artifact as the installer team is concentrating on - the Workstation Live ISO. Also, another advantage from my point of view is that people really care about this artifact, so the bar is set high for us. I'm afraid that if we switched some less-used artifacts, some issues caused by changing the underlying tool might go live unnoticed. I fully acknowledge that our approach has also a somewhat high risk, however as the change is trivially revertible, the risk is manageable. Anyway, I'm happy for any suggestions how to do this differently. > > If we are moving from kickstarts to blueprints, I would guess we need a > new repo for that and help converting things. > > Do we have a sense that livemedia-creator is going to keep being > used/work? There is likely a bunch of docs pointing to it that I would > suspect should be updated to point people to them. > > > * Release engineering: [https://pagure.io/releng/issue/11500 #11500] > > Provide ppc64le machines to Image Builder. Switch the pungi config to > > use Image Builder. > > Yeah. ;) > > I take it you have x86_64 and aarch64 in hand? > When we move all images over, will it be able to handle the capacity? > Do you know how many builds for Workstation live ISO we have on one day? I'm 99% sure we can handle it, internally, we are building about 100 images a day for RHEL with basically the same infra as is currently used for Fedora. Cheers, Ondřej
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
