Containers are a possible solution to add more OS's to the matrix.[0] However, I think containers do not support SELinux. Then we will not be able to test any feature/issue related to SELinux.
[0] https://docs.travis-ci.com/user/docker/ On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 3:55 PM, Dana Walker <dawal...@redhat.com> wrote: > I agree with Brian 100% that if we say something is officially supported, > we need to back that statement up, be that with Travis or some other level > of testing, or bugfix support, etc. > > Looking at the multi-os docs for Travis that Brian linked to, it looks > like it's only two options, Linux or OSX, and as he said Linux currently > just means Ubuntu, and OSX may face some hurdles. > > Are there other forms of testing we would be willing and able to use to be > able to officially back more OS's? I'd really like to see more broad > support. At the very least, yes, we can list that it should work on a > number of others and that we develop in Fedora, but certainly we can test > in more OS's to a level of confidence to count as official support, right? > > As for documentation, David, what sort of questions have you been getting > about it? I mean, we have documentation. I know we can likely improve it, > or at least the visibility of it as a recent review suggested. Is there a > particular area of concern that we could address? > > Thanks, > > --Dana > > Dana Walker > > Associate Software Engineer > > Red Hat > > <https://www.redhat.com> > <https://red.ht/sig> > > On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 3:02 PM, Brian Bouterse <bbout...@redhat.com> > wrote: > >> I want to advocate we follow the policy even for Fedora. We can >> anecdotally say in the distribution docs that we use Fedora in our >> development environment and that we expect it to work there too. >> >> Without CI it's hard to know on an everyday basis which specific versions >> of a distribution are working. For instance with Fedora, even with dev >> environments, it's possible that we aren't booting into both F27 and F28 >> often enough and Pulp break from a dependency change. With CI running for >> the supported OS's, we'll know almost as fast as our users do when there is >> an issue on a supported OS. I think this is part of the "supported OS" >> value proposition. It allows us to be very precise on exactly which >> versions are being continuously tested on, down to the specific versions. >> >> Other/more ideas are welcome. >> >> >> >> On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 1:19 PM David Davis <davidda...@redhat.com> >> wrote: >> >>> What about Fedora? We use it in our development environment so I think I >>> would feel comfortable claiming official support for it as well it’s not in >>> our CI environment. >>> >>> Other than that, your proposal sounds good to me. >>> >>> David >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 12:02 PM Brian Bouterse <bbout...@redhat.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Here is what makes sense to me. Let's have Pulp claim official support >>>> for any distro that we have CI for (Travis). This ensures every pull >>>> request change and nightlies are tested and provable on all supported >>>> distros. I believe support is about provable testing so without CI we can't >>>> ensure it in an ongoing way otherwise. Additionally though, we should say >>>> that Pulp will likely run anywhere that has the Python 3.6 runtime and has >>>> all necessary dependencies, which likely includes MacOS, Debian, etc. From >>>> a practical perspective Pulp likely will run well on all these distros, so >>>> even though we wouldn't claim formal support, our users probably aren't >>>> limited much in-practice. >>>> >>>> The only strange thing with ^ approach is that currently Travis only >>>> tests on Ubuntu so we would not be able to claim additional support until >>>> we started testing other distros in containers on Travis (totally do-able) >>>> [0]. I'm ok w/ that though. >>>> >>>> What do you all think? >>>> >>>> [0]: https://docs.travis-ci.com/user/multi-os/ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 1:52 PM, David Davis <davidda...@redhat.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Our last Pulp 3.0 planning ended a bit early a few weeks ago and there >>>>> were a few outstanding questions that I would like to bring up on list for >>>>> discussion and get some feedback. >>>>> >>>>> The first is around which OSes we are supporting and what will support >>>>> include (testing on the OS, fixing platform-specific bugs, etc). We >>>>> identified CentOS and Fedora as having official support. Then we also said >>>>> we would support MacOS, Debian, and Ubuntu. Some confirmation and >>>>> clarification on which OSes we are supporting and what support will mean >>>>> would be good. Does anyone have any thoughts? >>>>> >>>>> Secondly, I just wanted to confirm that for the RC, we are planning on >>>>> providing only Python packages via PyPI. I imagine we’ll work on providing >>>>> other packaging formats like RPMs after the RC but before the GA. >>>>> >>>>> Lastly, there were some questions around what level of documentation >>>>> we’re planning on having for the release. I’m not sure of a good way to >>>>> address this and am looking for feedback. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks. >>>>> >>>>> David >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Pulp-dev mailing list >>>>> Pulp-dev@redhat.com >>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pulp-dev mailing list >> Pulp-dev@redhat.com >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Pulp-dev mailing list > Pulp-dev@redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev > >
_______________________________________________ Pulp-dev mailing list Pulp-dev@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev