Delay in upcoming Two Week Atomic Release

[Sinny Kumari]

Hi all,

This email is to inform that there will be some delay in next Atomic Two
Week
Release. This is due to some issues with uploading Atomic AMIs. We are
working
on getting it fixed as soon as possible. Once we have AMIs back, we will do
next
Two week release.

Thanks,
Sinny
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Delay of Fedora Two Week Atomic Release

[Dusty Mabe]

Hi everyone,

During our testing of the recent 4.10 kernel that went in to Fedora 25
Atomic Host we found that openshift networking stopped working because
of a regression in the kernel related to openvswitch and MTU settings.  
This was fixed in the linux kernel upstream in commit 425df17c [1].

Since running openshift on top of Atomic Host is a primary use case we
are going to delay today's release of Fedora Atomic Host until we can
get the change backported into the 4.10 kernel and into Fedora 25. This
is being tracked by BZ1441310 [2].

The Fedora Atomic Team

[1] 
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=425df17c
[2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1441310
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: No Two Week Atomic Release

[Colin Walters]

On Thu, Oct 6, 2016, at 02:23 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 06, 2016 at 10:25:31AM -0700, Jason Brooks wrote:
> > > Is there a reason we can't pull in the selinux policy version
> > > that I fixed?
> > Is it in bodhi yet? I'd think it'd have to make it all the way through
> > to show up in a release. It's going to take a lot of karma, too.
> 
> I think we should have the ability to selectively pull things like this
> into Atomic from updates-testing. This seems like a poster-child case
> for when that might be a good idea. (But I don't see anything there,
> either.)


https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/selinux-policy-3.13.1-191.18.fc24
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-3b70b59f26
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: No Two Week Atomic Release

[Matthew Miller]

On Thu, Oct 06, 2016 at 10:25:31AM -0700, Jason Brooks wrote:
> > Is there a reason we can't pull in the selinux policy version
> > that I fixed?
> Is it in bodhi yet? I'd think it'd have to make it all the way through
> to show up in a release. It's going to take a lot of karma, too.

I think we should have the ability to selectively pull things like this
into Atomic from updates-testing. This seems like a poster-child case
for when that might be a good idea. (But I don't see anything there,
either.)

-- 
Matthew Miller

Fedora Project Leader
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: No Two Week Atomic Release

[Jason Brooks]

On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 10:19 AM, Colin Walters  wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 6, 2016, at 09:21 AM, Adam Miller wrote:
>> Hello all,
>> I just wanted to post a quick update that there has not been a
>> compose that passed all AutoCloud testing criteria for release in the
>> past two weeks. It appears that the Vagrant libvirt images are
>> failing.
>>
>> We will try again for a release next Two Week window.
>
> Is there a reason we can't pull in the selinux policy version
> that I fixed?

Is it in bodhi yet? I'd think it'd have to make it all the way through
to show up in a release. It's going to take a lot of karma, too.


> ___
> cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: No Two Week Atomic Release

[Colin Walters]

On Thu, Oct 6, 2016, at 09:21 AM, Adam Miller wrote:
> Hello all,
> I just wanted to post a quick update that there has not been a
> compose that passed all AutoCloud testing criteria for release in the
> past two weeks. It appears that the Vagrant libvirt images are
> failing.
> 
> We will try again for a release next Two Week window.

Is there a reason we can't pull in the selinux policy version
that I fixed?
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: No Two Week Atomic Release

[Jason Brooks]

On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 6:21 AM, Adam Miller
 wrote:
> Hello all,
> I just wanted to post a quick update that there has not been a
> compose that passed all AutoCloud testing criteria for release in the
> past two weeks. It appears that the Vagrant libvirt images are
> failing.

I just tried this image locally, and needed selinux=0 to boot. It
looks like https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1290659 strikes
again.

>
> We will try again for a release next Two Week window.
>
> Thank you,
> -AdamM
> ___
> cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

No Two Week Atomic Release

[Adam Miller]

Hello all,
I just wanted to post a quick update that there has not been a
compose that passed all AutoCloud testing criteria for release in the
past two weeks. It appears that the Vagrant libvirt images are
failing.

We will try again for a release next Two Week window.

Thank you,
-AdamM
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Fedora 24 Based Two-Week Atomic Release Delayed - Feedback Requested

[Josh Berkus]

On 06/22/2016 08:23 PM, Dusty Mabe wrote:
> 
> 
> On 06/22/2016 06:46 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
>>
 Incidentally, is there an ISO I can pull anywhere?  For my testing?
>>>
>>> Yes, sorry. I meant to include this in the original email.
>>>
>>> The new item is part of the new compose process which will reside here:
>>>
>>> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/compose/twoweek/
>>
>> Hmm.  I was hoping to be able to install Fedora24 Atomic for my Summit
>> Demo.  That directory tree doesn't include any ISOs AFAICT.
>>
>> Does anyone know where I can get ISO images in the next 24 hours?
>>
> 
> You mean like here? 
> 
> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/compose/twoweek/Fedora-Atomic-24-20160622.n.0/compose/Atomic/x86_64/iso/

That directory wasn't there yesterday ...


-- 
--
Josh Berkus
Project Atomic
Red Hat OSAS
___
cloud mailing list
cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Fedora 24 Based Two-Week Atomic Release Delayed - Feedback Requested

[Josh Berkus]

>> Incidentally, is there an ISO I can pull anywhere?  For my testing?
> 
> Yes, sorry. I meant to include this in the original email.
> 
> The new item is part of the new compose process which will reside here:
> 
> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/compose/twoweek/

Hmm.  I was hoping to be able to install Fedora24 Atomic for my Summit
Demo.  That directory tree doesn't include any ISOs AFAICT.

Does anyone know where I can get ISO images in the next 24 hours?

-- 
--
Josh Berkus
Project Atomic
Red Hat OSAS
___
cloud mailing list
cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Fedora 24 Based Two-Week Atomic Release Delayed - Feedback Requested

[Adam Miller]

On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 1:04 PM, Josh Berkus <jber...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 06/21/2016 09:21 AM, Adam Miller wrote:
>> We can slip the Fedora 24 Based Two-Week Atomic Release by 1 week just
>> as the Fedora 24 GA Release was slipped and target next Tuesday
>> (2016-06-21). This would "reset the clock" on the Two Week Releases
>> and we will then have a Two-Week Release every two weeks following
>> that one.
>
> I'm for getting it out as soon as we can.
>
> Incidentally, is there an ISO I can pull anywhere?  For my testing?

Yes, sorry. I meant to include this in the original email.

The new item is part of the new compose process which will reside here:

https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/compose/twoweek/

-AdamM

>
> --
> --
> Josh Berkus
> Project Atomic
> Red Hat OSAS
> ___
> cloud mailing list
> cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
___
cloud mailing list
cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: [atomic-devel] Fedora 24 Based Two-Week Atomic Release Delayed - Feedback Requested

[Adam Miller]

On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Jason Brooks <jbro...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 9:21 AM, Adam Miller
> <maxamill...@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>> Hello all,
>> The original schedule for today's Fedora Two-Week Atomic Release
>> was going to include a cut-over of our back end Release Infrastructure
>> and AutoCloud automated QA environment to be compose based (one of the
>> building blocks we need in place to make the future of the release
>> process more flexible). However, because of the most recent Fedora 24
>> release slip this has caused a conflict of schedules (a schedule that
>> was agreed upon at the Cloud FAD a few weeks ago) and as a side effect
>> of the Fedora 24 GA event we are currently in a Fedora Infrastructure
>> Freeze. During this Freeze, we can not make the back end changes
>> needed to cut over to the new versions of the RelEng Composer and
>> AutoCloud which are currently hosting the Fedora 24 Atomic Images.
>>
>> This is something that slipped through the cracks and ultimately lands
>> on me, and for that I would like to apologize to members of Project
>> Atomic, Fedora Cloud WG, and both project communities at large.
>>
>> That being said, we have a couple of options on how to handle this and
>> I would like to request feedback from others.
>>
>> We can slip the Fedora 24 Based Two-Week Atomic Release by 1 week just
>> as the Fedora 24 GA Release was slipped and target next Tuesday
>> (2016-06-21). This would "reset the clock" on the Two Week Releases
>> and we will then have a Two-Week Release every two weeks following
>> that one.
>
> I vote for this option, slip a week, reset the clock.

+1 - This one is my preference as well.

-AdamM

>
> Jason
>
>>
>> Or
>>
>> We can skip this Two-Week Atomic Release all together and target the
>> next Two-Week Atomic Release scheduled date of Tuesday 2016-07-05.
>>
>> Or
>>
>> We can release a Fedora 23 Based Two-Week Atomic image today (or
>> tomorrow, pending how fast feedback rolls in) and target the next
>> Two-Week Release window as the time to cut over to Fedora 24.
>>
>> I'm open to alternate suggestions but do note that aspects of the Two
>> Week release process are limiting at present, which is something this
>> new Infrastructure deployment will be the starting point to resolve,
>> so there may be restrictions on how creative of a solution we can come
>> up with in the near term.
>>
>> Once again, I would like to apologize to all who have been impacted by
>> this and we hope that with the planned changes to the Infrastructure
>> and the Release code will allow for more flexibility in the future.
>>
>> Thank you,
>> -AdamM
>>
___
cloud mailing list
cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Fedora 24 Based Two-Week Atomic Release Delayed - Feedback Requested

[Matthew Miller]

On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 11:21:42AM -0500, Adam Miller wrote:
> We can slip the Fedora 24 Based Two-Week Atomic Release by 1 week just
 Or
> We can skip this Two-Week Atomic Release all together and target the
> next Two-Week Atomic Release scheduled date of Tuesday 2016-07-05.
 Or
> We can release a Fedora 23 Based Two-Week Atomic image today (or
> tomorrow, pending how fast feedback rolls in) and target the next

I think any of these is fine. I have a slight preference for the first
option from just a high-level perspective, but ultimately, whatever the
teams working on it actually prefer.

-- 
Matthew Miller
<mat...@fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader
___
cloud mailing list
cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Fedora 24 Based Two-Week Atomic Release Delayed - Feedback Requested

[Josh Berkus]

On 06/21/2016 09:21 AM, Adam Miller wrote:
> We can slip the Fedora 24 Based Two-Week Atomic Release by 1 week just
> as the Fedora 24 GA Release was slipped and target next Tuesday
> (2016-06-21). This would "reset the clock" on the Two Week Releases
> and we will then have a Two-Week Release every two weeks following
> that one.

I'm for getting it out as soon as we can.

Incidentally, is there an ISO I can pull anywhere?  For my testing?

-- 
--
Josh Berkus
Project Atomic
Red Hat OSAS
___
cloud mailing list
cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: [atomic-devel] Fedora 24 Based Two-Week Atomic Release Delayed - Feedback Requested

[Jason Brooks]

On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 9:21 AM, Adam Miller
<maxamill...@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> Hello all,
> The original schedule for today's Fedora Two-Week Atomic Release
> was going to include a cut-over of our back end Release Infrastructure
> and AutoCloud automated QA environment to be compose based (one of the
> building blocks we need in place to make the future of the release
> process more flexible). However, because of the most recent Fedora 24
> release slip this has caused a conflict of schedules (a schedule that
> was agreed upon at the Cloud FAD a few weeks ago) and as a side effect
> of the Fedora 24 GA event we are currently in a Fedora Infrastructure
> Freeze. During this Freeze, we can not make the back end changes
> needed to cut over to the new versions of the RelEng Composer and
> AutoCloud which are currently hosting the Fedora 24 Atomic Images.
>
> This is something that slipped through the cracks and ultimately lands
> on me, and for that I would like to apologize to members of Project
> Atomic, Fedora Cloud WG, and both project communities at large.
>
> That being said, we have a couple of options on how to handle this and
> I would like to request feedback from others.
>
> We can slip the Fedora 24 Based Two-Week Atomic Release by 1 week just
> as the Fedora 24 GA Release was slipped and target next Tuesday
> (2016-06-21). This would "reset the clock" on the Two Week Releases
> and we will then have a Two-Week Release every two weeks following
> that one.

I vote for this option, slip a week, reset the clock.

Jason

>
> Or
>
> We can skip this Two-Week Atomic Release all together and target the
> next Two-Week Atomic Release scheduled date of Tuesday 2016-07-05.
>
> Or
>
> We can release a Fedora 23 Based Two-Week Atomic image today (or
> tomorrow, pending how fast feedback rolls in) and target the next
> Two-Week Release window as the time to cut over to Fedora 24.
>
> I'm open to alternate suggestions but do note that aspects of the Two
> Week release process are limiting at present, which is something this
> new Infrastructure deployment will be the starting point to resolve,
> so there may be restrictions on how creative of a solution we can come
> up with in the near term.
>
> Once again, I would like to apologize to all who have been impacted by
> this and we hope that with the planned changes to the Infrastructure
> and the Release code will allow for more flexibility in the future.
>
> Thank you,
> -AdamM
>
___
cloud mailing list
cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org