Re: Fedora CoreOS stable stream now rebased to Fedora 34

2021-05-21 Thread Dusty Mabe 


On 5/20/21 12:13 PM, Ron Olson wrote:
> If I may, I think the issue is right there in the name: Fedora CoreOS. The 
> Fedora name brings some expectations and it seems CoreOS, by its nature, 
> can’t be at parity with the other Fedora flavors and that leads to confusion. 
> I can attest that I was surprised when I learned Fedora CoreOS didn’t support 
> cgroups v2 and that confused me; it’s Fedora, of course it would have the 
> latest-n-greatest.

One clarification here.. It does support cgroups v2, it's just not enabled by 
default. It's just a kernel parameter.

Specifically for cgroups v2, the default is changing here in the next month. So 
FCOS will default to cgroups v2.
We're trying to make sure users have a good experience. Docker users are a big 
part of that. Changing the default
before Docker supported cgroups v2 was really not an option for us at the time.

> 
> I used CoreOS before it bought by RH, and I could accept whatever limitations 
> it had because there were no expectations. Here’s a specialized distro that 
> does things in its own way.
> 
> I’m guessing this is laughably not possible, but I’m going to suggest anyway 
> that maybe it be renamed either back to simply “CoreOS” or something new like 
> “Bowler” or whatever that indicates that it is its own special thing and 
> expectations can be set accordingly.
___
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 on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora CoreOS stable stream now rebased to Fedora 34

2021-05-21 Thread Clement Verna 
On Thu, 20 May 2021 at 18:14, Ron Olson  wrote:

> If I may, I think the issue is right there in the name: Fedora CoreOS. The
> Fedora name brings some expectations and it seems CoreOS, by its nature,
> can’t be at parity with the other Fedora flavors and that leads to
> confusion. I can attest that I was surprised when I learned Fedora CoreOS
> didn’t support cgroups v2 and that confused me; it’s Fedora, of course it
> would have the latest-n-greatest.
>
> I used CoreOS before it bought by RH, and I could accept whatever
> limitations it had because there were no expectations. Here’s a specialized
> distro that does things in its own way.
>
> I’m guessing this is laughably not possible, but I’m going to suggest
> anyway that maybe it be renamed either back to simply “CoreOS” or something
> new like “Bowler” or whatever that indicates that it is its own special
> thing and expectations can be set accordingly.
>
I understand that having Fedora in the name can bring some expectations and
that changing these might be hard, but I think it is good to remember that
the first FCOS release is not even 2 years old [0]. FCOS has a different
release model than Fedora Linux and I think it is fair to give it time to,
on one hand continue to improve how features are making their way in FCOS,
and on the other hand get people be more familiar with what FCOS is and
what expectations to have about it.

[0] - https://fedoramagazine.org/introducing-fedora-coreos/

> On 20 May 2021, at 2:24, Clement Verna wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, 19 May 2021 at 22:48, Joe Doss  wrote:
>
>> On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 2:45 AM Clement Verna
>> >  wrote:
>> >> I think this is the fundamental difference here, Fedora CoreOS does
>> >> not have a version number. It has 3 streams, stable, testing and
>> >> next, these streams are based on a version of Fedora Linux but that
>> >> should just be a detail that most end users should not have to care
>> >> about.
>>
>> I disagree here. Fedora CoreOS has the Fedora name in it and it should
>> have the same fundamental features and changes that ship with each
>> Fedora release. To say it doesn't have a base version and that users
>> shouldn't care about it is pretty dismissive.
>>
>
> Sorry if that sounded dismissive, but that's really how I feel. I
> recognize that I have a bias towards thinking that most FCOS users are
> similar to my profile.
> I am a developer and I don't have a strong interest in the OS, I just
> expect it to work and provide me the tools needed to do my job. To me
> that's the beauty of FCOS, I get a solid, tested OS that get automated
> updates and just works, I honestly don't care to know which version of
> Fedora Linux it is based on or which features it has. I want to spin-up an
> instance make sure that my application works and forget about it.
> I also understand that there are other type of users that will care much
> more about the base OS than me:-).
>
>
>>
>> >> Another difference is that Fedora CoreOS has automatic updates and
>> >> if we want our users to trust these automatic updates we need them
>> >> to be rock solid. This leads to Fedora CoreOS being more
>> >> conservative on how changes are rolled out to users, taking the
>> >> example rolling out cgroups v2 in the Fedora 31 time frame would
>> >> have broken all users that are using Docker to run their containers
>> >> and this was not acceptable :-).
>> >>
>> >> If some users are getting confused and get curious about why there
>> >> are these differences and learn more about how Fedora CoreOS works,
>> >> that's a good thing IMO :-)
>>
>> Confusing and frustrating your users is a bad thing.
>>
>
>> On 5/19/21 6:54 AM, Neal Gompa wrote:
>> > No. This is a cop-out and a bad answer. The reason this happened is
>> > because Fedora CoreOS historically has not participated in the
>> > development of Fedora Linux, including the Changes process, and
>> > generally rolled back features instead of adapting with them during
>> > the development cycle.
>> >
>> > It's not like making changes and breaking upgrades is acceptable in
>> > Fedora Linux either. It's just that the Fedora CoreOS WG has not
>> > participated in the main development process and rolled back changes
>> > instead of adapting to them, which has frustrated pretty much
>> > everyone. The containers team in particular was extremely unhappy to
>> > find out cgroup v1 was still used in FCOS. I was pretty cheesed off
>> > when I discovered the sqlite rpmdb feature was rolled back in FCOS.
>> >
>> > In general, I'm not pleased with how Fedora CoreOS does this.
>> > Hopefully they will do better in the future.
>>
>> I'll echo Neal's sentiment here. This is a cop-out and bad answer.
>>
>
>> It is frustrating to consume FCOS only to see features that are in the
>> current release of Fedora are rolled back. Even in today's FCOS WG
>> meeting I brought up adding in zswap to FCOS and it is shelved until
>> Kubernetes adds for support swap enabled systems.
>>
>> The RHCOS and

Re: Fedora CoreOS stable stream now rebased to Fedora 34

2021-05-21 Thread Clement Verna 
On Thu, 20 May 2021 at 10:00, Vít Ondruch  wrote:

>
> Dne 20. 05. 21 v 8:54 Clement Verna napsal(a):
>
>
>
> On Wed, 19 May 2021 at 13:55, Neal Gompa  wrote:
>
>> On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 2:45 AM Clement Verna 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, 19 May 2021 at 06:50, Tomasz Torcz 
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Dnia Tue, May 18, 2021 at 03:37:27PM -0400, Dusty Mabe napisał(a):
>> >> > Over the next two days we're rolling out the first Fedora 34 based
>> >> > Fedora CoreOS into the `stable` stream.
>> >> >
>> >> > - systemd-resolved is still enabled but not used yet [1]
>> >>
>> >>   This was Fedora 33 feature.
>> >>
>> >> > - Move to cgroup v2 by default [5].
>> >>
>> >>   This was Fedora 31 feature.
>> >>
>> >>   I was wondering: Fedora CoreOS actively undoes distribution-wide
>> >> changes (at least the two above, I remember lagging with iptables-nft
>> >> around Fedora 32).  End user may confused, seeing the list of changes
>> >> for the release X, but receiving only few of them with edition CoreOS
>> X.
>> >>
>> >>   Should such divergence be allowed?  Should Fedora CoreOS use the same
>> >> version number while not containing all the changes from main Fedora
>> Linux?
>> >
>> >
>> > I think this is the fundamental difference here, Fedora CoreOS does not
>> have a version number. It has 3 streams, stable, testing and next, these
>> streams are based on a version of Fedora Linux but that should just be a
>> detail that most end users should not have to care about.
>> > Another difference is that Fedora CoreOS has automatic updates and if
>> we want our users to trust these automatic updates we need them to be rock
>> solid. This leads to Fedora CoreOS being more conservative on how changes
>> are rolled out to users, taking the example rolling out cgroups v2 in the
>> Fedora 31 time frame would have broken all users that are using Docker to
>> run their containers and this was not acceptable :-).
>> >
>> >  If some users are getting confused and get curious about why there are
>> these differences and learn more about how Fedora CoreOS works, that's a
>> good thing IMO :-)
>>
>> No. This is a cop-out and a bad answer.
>
> The reason this happened is
>> because Fedora CoreOS historically has not participated in the
>> development of Fedora Linux, including the Changes process, and
>> generally rolled back features instead of adapting with them during
>> the development cycle.
>>
>
> I don't think it is fair to say that FCOS is not participating in the
> Change process. FCOS is following closely the Change Proposals
> [0][1][2][3]. I agree that we could do a better job at submitting Change
> Proposals and that's something we should improve on.
> One thing I have a hard time to understand tho, if what happens when a
> Change proposals breaks FCOS (like cgroups v2 for example) ? Should that
> just be rejected ?
>
>
> Why not if somebody raises such point? Just briefly looking on
> fedora-devel threads and the related fesco ticket, I don't see FCOS
> mentioned anywhere in this context.
>
Yes, that's maybe something where the FCOS Working Group can be more vocal
:-)


>
> Vít
>
>
> AFAIK not all changes are adopted by every Editions or Spins. What is in
> your opinion the correct way forward ?
>
>
>
>>
>> It's not like making changes and breaking upgrades is acceptable in
>> Fedora Linux either.
>
>
> Breaking or non backward compatible changes are acceptable in Fedora Linux
> tho between major version bump. Again here the cgroups v2 is a good
> example, folks using Docker had to perform some manual steps to switch back
> to cgroups v1 to keep using their workflow working. This is fine when you
> have a major version bump but this does not happen in FCOS.
>
>
>> It's just that the Fedora CoreOS WG has not
>> participated in the main development process and rolled back changes
>> instead of adapting to them, which has frustrated pretty much
>> everyone. The containers team in particular was extremely unhappy to
>> find out cgroup v1 was still used in FCOS. I was pretty cheesed off
>> when I discovered the sqlite rpmdb feature was rolled back in FCOS.
>>
>
>> In general, I'm not pleased with how Fedora CoreOS does this.
>> Hopefully they will do better in the future.
>>
>
> [0] - https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/372
> [1] - https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/609
> [2] - https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/704
> [3] - https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/824
>
>
>>
>> --
>> 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
>> ___
>> 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:
>>

Re: Fedora CoreOS stable stream now rebased to Fedora 34

2021-05-20 Thread Stephen John Smoogen 
On Thu, 20 May 2021 at 12:50, Colin Walters  wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2021, at 12:31 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>
> > Then maybe FCOS needs to have a major version number to indicate that
> > these breaks are going to happen. I am going to say off the bat it DOES
> > NOT need to be the same as the Fedora Linux release number. It also
> > doesn't mean that number change means that you can't move a system from
> > say FCOS-1 to FCOS-2... but that you make no promises of moving it back
> > to FCOS-1.
>
> I do think we should probably have a page which lists "provisioning
> discontinuities" as I'd call it where newly provisioned nodes have an
> important new behavior.  That's related to, but not the same thing as a
> version number.
>
> > Eventually something is going to cause this. The many changes like:
> > cgroups etc are adding up to an area where FCOS will reach a point it
> > only 'matches' Fedora in name and might as well be based off of Debian
> > Jessie or Slackware 14.2 or CentOS-8 Stream.
>
> I think an even moderately objective analysis would show that statement to
> be simply hyperbole.If you meant it that way, it wasn't useful to say.
> If you didn't, please think about it more and particularly consider all the
> linkages FCOS has with other Fedora editions.
>
>
It was hyperbole, and it wasn't useful. My apologies to you and your team
for that.


-- 
Stephen J Smoogen.
I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Flame wars in
sci.astro.orion. I have seen SPAM filters overload because of Godwin's Law.
All those moments will be lost in time... like posts on  BBS... time to
reboot.
___
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 on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora CoreOS stable stream now rebased to Fedora 34

2021-05-20 Thread Colin Walters 


On Thu, May 20, 2021, at 12:31 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:

> Then maybe FCOS needs to have a major version number to indicate that 
> these breaks are going to happen. I am going to say off the bat it DOES 
> NOT need to be the same as the Fedora Linux release number. It also 
> doesn't mean that number change means that you can't move a system from 
> say FCOS-1 to FCOS-2... but that you make no promises of moving it back 
> to FCOS-1. 

I do think we should probably have a page which lists "provisioning 
discontinuities" as I'd call it where newly provisioned nodes have an important 
new behavior.  That's related to, but not the same thing as a version number.

> Eventually something is going to cause this. The many changes like: 
> cgroups etc are adding up to an area where FCOS will reach a point it 
> only 'matches' Fedora in name and might as well be based off of Debian 
> Jessie or Slackware 14.2 or CentOS-8 Stream. 

I think an even moderately objective analysis would show that statement to be 
simply hyperbole.If you meant it that way, it wasn't useful to say.  If you 
didn't, please think about it more and particularly consider all the linkages 
FCOS has with other Fedora editions.
___
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 on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora CoreOS stable stream now rebased to Fedora 34

2021-05-20 Thread Colin Walters 


On Thu, May 20, 2021, at 10:01 AM, Daniel Walsh wrote:
> 
> This might end up being a major problem with FCOS, if we are stuck with 
> the defaults forever, and never able to take advantage of new 
> technology.

Note that with cgroups v2, the status quo is that nodes updated in place stay 
on v1.  Newly provisioned nodes get the new default v2.

This was all explained IMO fairly clearly: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/cor...@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/6NGBXYMJ4YU3V667XN627WOGCJA47POT/

This is a pattern that can have a similar effect as Fedora version 
discontinuities.  So it's not "forever".  




___
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 on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora CoreOS stable stream now rebased to Fedora 34

2021-05-20 Thread Stephen John Smoogen 
On Thu, 20 May 2021 at 02:55, Clement Verna 
wrote:

>
>
>
>
>> It's not like making changes and breaking upgrades is acceptable in
>> Fedora Linux either.
>
>
> Breaking or non backward compatible changes are acceptable in Fedora Linux
> tho between major version bump. Again here the cgroups v2 is a good
> example, folks using Docker had to perform some manual steps to switch back
> to cgroups v1 to keep using their workflow working. This is fine when you
> have a major version bump but this does not happen in FCOS.
>
>

Then maybe FCOS needs to have a major version number to indicate that these
breaks are going to happen. I am going to say off the bat it DOES NOT need
to be the same as the Fedora Linux release number. It also doesn't mean
that number change means that you can't move a system from say FCOS-1 to
FCOS-2... but that you make no promises of moving it back to FCOS-1.

Eventually something is going to cause this. The many changes like: cgroups
etc are adding up to an area where FCOS will reach a point it only
'matches' Fedora in name and might as well be based off of Debian Jessie or
Slackware 14.2 or CentOS-8 Stream.

-- 
Stephen J Smoogen.
I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Flame wars in
sci.astro.orion. I have seen SPAM filters overload because of Godwin's Law.
All those moments will be lost in time... like posts on  BBS... time to
reboot.
___
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 on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora CoreOS stable stream now rebased to Fedora 34

2021-05-20 Thread Ron Olson 
If I may, I think the issue is right there in the name: Fedora CoreOS. The 
Fedora name brings some expectations and it seems CoreOS, by its nature, can’t 
be at parity with the other Fedora flavors and that leads to confusion. I can 
attest that I was surprised when I learned Fedora CoreOS didn’t support cgroups 
v2 and that confused me; it’s Fedora, of course it would have the 
latest-n-greatest.

I used CoreOS before it bought by RH, and I could accept whatever limitations 
it had because there were no expectations. Here’s a specialized distro that 
does things in its own way.

I’m guessing this is laughably not possible, but I’m going to suggest anyway 
that maybe it be renamed either back to simply “CoreOS” or something new like 
“Bowler” or whatever that indicates that it is its own special thing and 
expectations can be set accordingly.

On 20 May 2021, at 2:24, Clement Verna wrote:

> On Wed, 19 May 2021 at 22:48, Joe Doss  wrote:
>
>> On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 2:45 AM Clement Verna
>>>  wrote:
 I think this is the fundamental difference here, Fedora CoreOS does
 not have a version number. It has 3 streams, stable, testing and
 next, these streams are based on a version of Fedora Linux but that
 should just be a detail that most end users should not have to care
 about.
>>
>> I disagree here. Fedora CoreOS has the Fedora name in it and it should
>> have the same fundamental features and changes that ship with each
>> Fedora release. To say it doesn't have a base version and that users
>> shouldn't care about it is pretty dismissive.
>>
>
> Sorry if that sounded dismissive, but that's really how I feel. I recognize
> that I have a bias towards thinking that most FCOS users are similar to my
> profile.
> I am a developer and I don't have a strong interest in the OS, I just
> expect it to work and provide me the tools needed to do my job. To me
> that's the beauty of FCOS, I get a solid, tested OS that get automated
> updates and just works, I honestly don't care to know which version of
> Fedora Linux it is based on or which features it has. I want to spin-up an
> instance make sure that my application works and forget about it.
> I also understand that there are other type of users that will care much
> more about the base OS than me:-).
>
>
>>
 Another difference is that Fedora CoreOS has automatic updates and
 if we want our users to trust these automatic updates we need them
 to be rock solid. This leads to Fedora CoreOS being more
 conservative on how changes are rolled out to users, taking the
 example rolling out cgroups v2 in the Fedora 31 time frame would
 have broken all users that are using Docker to run their containers
 and this was not acceptable :-).

 If some users are getting confused and get curious about why there
 are these differences and learn more about how Fedora CoreOS works,
 that's a good thing IMO :-)
>>
>> Confusing and frustrating your users is a bad thing.
>>
>
>> On 5/19/21 6:54 AM, Neal Gompa wrote:
>>> No. This is a cop-out and a bad answer. The reason this happened is
>>> because Fedora CoreOS historically has not participated in the
>>> development of Fedora Linux, including the Changes process, and
>>> generally rolled back features instead of adapting with them during
>>> the development cycle.
>>>
>>> It's not like making changes and breaking upgrades is acceptable in
>>> Fedora Linux either. It's just that the Fedora CoreOS WG has not
>>> participated in the main development process and rolled back changes
>>> instead of adapting to them, which has frustrated pretty much
>>> everyone. The containers team in particular was extremely unhappy to
>>> find out cgroup v1 was still used in FCOS. I was pretty cheesed off
>>> when I discovered the sqlite rpmdb feature was rolled back in FCOS.
>>>
>>> In general, I'm not pleased with how Fedora CoreOS does this.
>>> Hopefully they will do better in the future.
>>
>> I'll echo Neal's sentiment here. This is a cop-out and bad answer.
>>
>
>> It is frustrating to consume FCOS only to see features that are in the
>> current release of Fedora are rolled back. Even in today's FCOS WG
>> meeting I brought up adding in zswap to FCOS and it is shelved until
>> Kubernetes adds for support swap enabled systems.
>>
>> The RHCOS and Openshift teams should be back porting these breaking
>> changes, so FCOS can look to the future with Fedora. FCOS should not be
>> shackled by limits imposed by RHCOS/Openshift/Kubernetes.
>>
>> Joe
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Joe Doss
>> j...@solidadmin.com
>> ___
>> 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:
>>

Re: Fedora CoreOS stable stream now rebased to Fedora 34

2021-05-20 Thread Daniel Walsh 

On 5/20/21 02:54, Clement Verna wrote:



On Wed, 19 May 2021 at 13:55, Neal Gompa > wrote:


On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 2:45 AM Clement Verna
mailto:cve...@fedoraproject.org>> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, 19 May 2021 at 06:50, Tomasz Torcz mailto:to...@pipebreaker.pl>> wrote:
>>
>> Dnia Tue, May 18, 2021 at 03:37:27PM -0400, Dusty Mabe napisał(a):
>> > Over the next two days we're rolling out the first Fedora 34
based
>> > Fedora CoreOS into the `stable` stream.
>> >
>> > - systemd-resolved is still enabled but not used yet [1]
>>
>>   This was Fedora 33 feature.
>>
>> > - Move to cgroup v2 by default [5].
>>
>>   This was Fedora 31 feature.
>>
>>   I was wondering: Fedora CoreOS actively undoes distribution-wide
>> changes (at least the two above, I remember lagging with
iptables-nft
>> around Fedora 32).  End user may confused, seeing the list of
changes
>> for the release X, but receiving only few of them with edition
CoreOS X.
>>
>>   Should such divergence be allowed?  Should Fedora CoreOS use
the same
>> version number while not containing all the changes from main
Fedora Linux?
>
>
> I think this is the fundamental difference here, Fedora CoreOS
does not have a version number. It has 3 streams, stable, testing
and next, these streams are based on a version of Fedora Linux but
that should just be a detail that most end users should not have
to care about.
> Another difference is that Fedora CoreOS has automatic updates
and if we want our users to trust these automatic updates we need
them to be rock solid. This leads to Fedora CoreOS being more
conservative on how changes are rolled out to users, taking the
example rolling out cgroups v2 in the Fedora 31 time frame would
have broken all users that are using Docker to run their
containers and this was not acceptable :-).
>
>  If some users are getting confused and get curious about why
there are these differences and learn more about how Fedora CoreOS
works, that's a good thing IMO :-)

No. This is a cop-out and a bad answer.

The reason this happened is
because Fedora CoreOS historically has not participated in the
development of Fedora Linux, including the Changes process, and
generally rolled back features instead of adapting with them during
the development cycle.


I don't think it is fair to say that FCOS is not participating in the 
Change process. FCOS is following closely the Change Proposals 
[0][1][2][3]. I agree that we could do a better job at submitting 
Change Proposals and that's something we should improve on.
One thing I have a hard time to understand tho, if what happens when a 
Change proposals breaks FCOS (like cgroups v2 for example) ? Should 
that just be rejected ? AFAIK not all changes are adopted by every 
Editions or Spins. What is in your opinion the correct way forward ?



It's not like making changes and breaking upgrades is acceptable in
Fedora Linux either. 



Breaking or non backward compatible changes are acceptable in Fedora 
Linux tho between major version bump. Again here the cgroups v2 is a 
good example, folks using Docker had to perform some manual steps to 
switch back to cgroups v1 to keep using their workflow working. This 
is fine when you have a major version bump but this does not happen in 
FCOS.
This might end up being a major problem with FCOS, if we are stuck with 
the defaults forever, and never able to take advantage of new technology.


It's just that the Fedora CoreOS WG has not
participated in the main development process and rolled back changes
instead of adapting to them, which has frustrated pretty much
everyone. The containers team in particular was extremely unhappy to
find out cgroup v1 was still used in FCOS. I was pretty cheesed off
when I discovered the sqlite rpmdb feature was rolled back in FCOS.


In general, I'm not pleased with how Fedora CoreOS does this.
Hopefully they will do better in the future.


[0] - https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/372 

[1] - https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/609 

[2] - https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/704 

[3] - https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/824 




-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!

___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

To unsubscribe send an email to
devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Fedora CoreOS stable stream now rebased to Fedora 34

2021-05-20 Thread Vít Ondruch 


Dne 20. 05. 21 v 8:54 Clement Verna napsal(a):



On Wed, 19 May 2021 at 13:55, Neal Gompa > wrote:


On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 2:45 AM Clement Verna
mailto:cve...@fedoraproject.org>> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, 19 May 2021 at 06:50, Tomasz Torcz mailto:to...@pipebreaker.pl>> wrote:
>>
>> Dnia Tue, May 18, 2021 at 03:37:27PM -0400, Dusty Mabe napisał(a):
>> > Over the next two days we're rolling out the first Fedora 34
based
>> > Fedora CoreOS into the `stable` stream.
>> >
>> > - systemd-resolved is still enabled but not used yet [1]
>>
>>   This was Fedora 33 feature.
>>
>> > - Move to cgroup v2 by default [5].
>>
>>   This was Fedora 31 feature.
>>
>>   I was wondering: Fedora CoreOS actively undoes distribution-wide
>> changes (at least the two above, I remember lagging with
iptables-nft
>> around Fedora 32).  End user may confused, seeing the list of
changes
>> for the release X, but receiving only few of them with edition
CoreOS X.
>>
>>   Should such divergence be allowed?  Should Fedora CoreOS use
the same
>> version number while not containing all the changes from main
Fedora Linux?
>
>
> I think this is the fundamental difference here, Fedora CoreOS
does not have a version number. It has 3 streams, stable, testing
and next, these streams are based on a version of Fedora Linux but
that should just be a detail that most end users should not have
to care about.
> Another difference is that Fedora CoreOS has automatic updates
and if we want our users to trust these automatic updates we need
them to be rock solid. This leads to Fedora CoreOS being more
conservative on how changes are rolled out to users, taking the
example rolling out cgroups v2 in the Fedora 31 time frame would
have broken all users that are using Docker to run their
containers and this was not acceptable :-).
>
>  If some users are getting confused and get curious about why
there are these differences and learn more about how Fedora CoreOS
works, that's a good thing IMO :-)

No. This is a cop-out and a bad answer.

The reason this happened is
because Fedora CoreOS historically has not participated in the
development of Fedora Linux, including the Changes process, and
generally rolled back features instead of adapting with them during
the development cycle.


I don't think it is fair to say that FCOS is not participating in the 
Change process. FCOS is following closely the Change Proposals 
[0][1][2][3]. I agree that we could do a better job at submitting 
Change Proposals and that's something we should improve on.
One thing I have a hard time to understand tho, if what happens when a 
Change proposals breaks FCOS (like cgroups v2 for example) ? Should 
that just be rejected ?



Why not if somebody raises such point? Just briefly looking on 
fedora-devel threads and the related fesco ticket, I don't see FCOS 
mentioned anywhere in this context.



Vít


AFAIK not all changes are adopted by every Editions or Spins. What is 
in your opinion the correct way forward ?



It's not like making changes and breaking upgrades is acceptable in
Fedora Linux either. 



Breaking or non backward compatible changes are acceptable in Fedora 
Linux tho between major version bump. Again here the cgroups v2 is a 
good example, folks using Docker had to perform some manual steps to 
switch back to cgroups v1 to keep using their workflow working. This 
is fine when you have a major version bump but this does not happen in 
FCOS.


It's just that the Fedora CoreOS WG has not
participated in the main development process and rolled back changes
instead of adapting to them, which has frustrated pretty much
everyone. The containers team in particular was extremely unhappy to
find out cgroup v1 was still used in FCOS. I was pretty cheesed off
when I discovered the sqlite rpmdb feature was rolled back in FCOS.


In general, I'm not pleased with how Fedora CoreOS does this.
Hopefully they will do better in the future.


[0] - https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/372 

[1] - https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/609 

[2] - https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/704 

[3] - https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/824 




-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!

___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

To unsubscribe send an email to

Re: Fedora CoreOS stable stream now rebased to Fedora 34

2021-05-20 Thread Clement Verna 
On Wed, 19 May 2021 at 22:48, Joe Doss  wrote:

> On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 2:45 AM Clement Verna
> >  wrote:
> >> I think this is the fundamental difference here, Fedora CoreOS does
> >> not have a version number. It has 3 streams, stable, testing and
> >> next, these streams are based on a version of Fedora Linux but that
> >> should just be a detail that most end users should not have to care
> >> about.
>
> I disagree here. Fedora CoreOS has the Fedora name in it and it should
> have the same fundamental features and changes that ship with each
> Fedora release. To say it doesn't have a base version and that users
> shouldn't care about it is pretty dismissive.
>

Sorry if that sounded dismissive, but that's really how I feel. I recognize
that I have a bias towards thinking that most FCOS users are similar to my
profile.
I am a developer and I don't have a strong interest in the OS, I just
expect it to work and provide me the tools needed to do my job. To me
that's the beauty of FCOS, I get a solid, tested OS that get automated
updates and just works, I honestly don't care to know which version of
Fedora Linux it is based on or which features it has. I want to spin-up an
instance make sure that my application works and forget about it.
I also understand that there are other type of users that will care much
more about the base OS than me:-).


>
> >> Another difference is that Fedora CoreOS has automatic updates and
> >> if we want our users to trust these automatic updates we need them
> >> to be rock solid. This leads to Fedora CoreOS being more
> >> conservative on how changes are rolled out to users, taking the
> >> example rolling out cgroups v2 in the Fedora 31 time frame would
> >> have broken all users that are using Docker to run their containers
> >> and this was not acceptable :-).
> >>
> >> If some users are getting confused and get curious about why there
> >> are these differences and learn more about how Fedora CoreOS works,
> >> that's a good thing IMO :-)
>
> Confusing and frustrating your users is a bad thing.
>

> On 5/19/21 6:54 AM, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > No. This is a cop-out and a bad answer. The reason this happened is
> > because Fedora CoreOS historically has not participated in the
> > development of Fedora Linux, including the Changes process, and
> > generally rolled back features instead of adapting with them during
> > the development cycle.
> >
> > It's not like making changes and breaking upgrades is acceptable in
> > Fedora Linux either. It's just that the Fedora CoreOS WG has not
> > participated in the main development process and rolled back changes
> > instead of adapting to them, which has frustrated pretty much
> > everyone. The containers team in particular was extremely unhappy to
> > find out cgroup v1 was still used in FCOS. I was pretty cheesed off
> > when I discovered the sqlite rpmdb feature was rolled back in FCOS.
> >
> > In general, I'm not pleased with how Fedora CoreOS does this.
> > Hopefully they will do better in the future.
>
> I'll echo Neal's sentiment here. This is a cop-out and bad answer.
>

> It is frustrating to consume FCOS only to see features that are in the
> current release of Fedora are rolled back. Even in today's FCOS WG
> meeting I brought up adding in zswap to FCOS and it is shelved until
> Kubernetes adds for support swap enabled systems.
>
> The RHCOS and Openshift teams should be back porting these breaking
> changes, so FCOS can look to the future with Fedora. FCOS should not be
> shackled by limits imposed by RHCOS/Openshift/Kubernetes.
>
> Joe
>
>
>
> --
> Joe Doss
> j...@solidadmin.com
> ___
> 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 on the list, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
>
___
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 on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora CoreOS stable stream now rebased to Fedora 34

2021-05-20 Thread Clement Verna 
On Wed, 19 May 2021 at 13:55, Neal Gompa  wrote:

> On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 2:45 AM Clement Verna 
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 19 May 2021 at 06:50, Tomasz Torcz  wrote:
> >>
> >> Dnia Tue, May 18, 2021 at 03:37:27PM -0400, Dusty Mabe napisał(a):
> >> > Over the next two days we're rolling out the first Fedora 34 based
> >> > Fedora CoreOS into the `stable` stream.
> >> >
> >> > - systemd-resolved is still enabled but not used yet [1]
> >>
> >>   This was Fedora 33 feature.
> >>
> >> > - Move to cgroup v2 by default [5].
> >>
> >>   This was Fedora 31 feature.
> >>
> >>   I was wondering: Fedora CoreOS actively undoes distribution-wide
> >> changes (at least the two above, I remember lagging with iptables-nft
> >> around Fedora 32).  End user may confused, seeing the list of changes
> >> for the release X, but receiving only few of them with edition CoreOS X.
> >>
> >>   Should such divergence be allowed?  Should Fedora CoreOS use the same
> >> version number while not containing all the changes from main Fedora
> Linux?
> >
> >
> > I think this is the fundamental difference here, Fedora CoreOS does not
> have a version number. It has 3 streams, stable, testing and next, these
> streams are based on a version of Fedora Linux but that should just be a
> detail that most end users should not have to care about.
> > Another difference is that Fedora CoreOS has automatic updates and if we
> want our users to trust these automatic updates we need them to be rock
> solid. This leads to Fedora CoreOS being more conservative on how changes
> are rolled out to users, taking the example rolling out cgroups v2 in the
> Fedora 31 time frame would have broken all users that are using Docker to
> run their containers and this was not acceptable :-).
> >
> >  If some users are getting confused and get curious about why there are
> these differences and learn more about how Fedora CoreOS works, that's a
> good thing IMO :-)
>
> No. This is a cop-out and a bad answer.

The reason this happened is
> because Fedora CoreOS historically has not participated in the
> development of Fedora Linux, including the Changes process, and
> generally rolled back features instead of adapting with them during
> the development cycle.
>

I don't think it is fair to say that FCOS is not participating in the
Change process. FCOS is following closely the Change Proposals
[0][1][2][3]. I agree that we could do a better job at submitting Change
Proposals and that's something we should improve on.
One thing I have a hard time to understand tho, if what happens when a
Change proposals breaks FCOS (like cgroups v2 for example) ? Should that
just be rejected ? AFAIK not all changes are adopted by every Editions or
Spins. What is in your opinion the correct way forward ?



>
> It's not like making changes and breaking upgrades is acceptable in
> Fedora Linux either.


Breaking or non backward compatible changes are acceptable in Fedora Linux
tho between major version bump. Again here the cgroups v2 is a good
example, folks using Docker had to perform some manual steps to switch back
to cgroups v1 to keep using their workflow working. This is fine when you
have a major version bump but this does not happen in FCOS.


> It's just that the Fedora CoreOS WG has not
> participated in the main development process and rolled back changes
> instead of adapting to them, which has frustrated pretty much
> everyone. The containers team in particular was extremely unhappy to
> find out cgroup v1 was still used in FCOS. I was pretty cheesed off
> when I discovered the sqlite rpmdb feature was rolled back in FCOS.
>

> In general, I'm not pleased with how Fedora CoreOS does this.
> Hopefully they will do better in the future.
>

[0] - https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/372
[1] - https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/609
[2] - https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/704
[3] - https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/824


>
> --
> 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
> ___
> 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 on the list, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
>
___
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:

Re: Fedora CoreOS stable stream now rebased to Fedora 34

2021-05-19 Thread Joe Doss 

On 5/19/21 4:13 PM, Michael Catanzaro wrote:

FYI we are using zram in other Fedora editions. zswap is different.


Sorry, got my names mixed up. Thanks Michael!

Joe



--
Joe Doss
j...@solidadmin.com
___
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 on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora CoreOS stable stream now rebased to Fedora 34

2021-05-19 Thread Michael Catanzaro 
On Wed, May 19 2021 at 03:46:48 PM -0500, Joe Doss  
wrote:

Even in today's FCOS WG
meeting I brought up adding in zswap to FCOS and it is shelved until
Kubernetes adds for support swap enabled systems.


FYI we are using zram in other Fedora editions. zswap is different.

Michael

___
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 on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora CoreOS stable stream now rebased to Fedora 34

2021-05-19 Thread Joe Doss 

On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 2:45 AM Clement Verna

 wrote:

I think this is the fundamental difference here, Fedora CoreOS does
not have a version number. It has 3 streams, stable, testing and
next, these streams are based on a version of Fedora Linux but that
should just be a detail that most end users should not have to care
about.


I disagree here. Fedora CoreOS has the Fedora name in it and it should 
have the same fundamental features and changes that ship with each 
Fedora release. To say it doesn't have a base version and that users 
shouldn't care about it is pretty dismissive.



Another difference is that Fedora CoreOS has automatic updates and
if we want our users to trust these automatic updates we need them
to be rock solid. This leads to Fedora CoreOS being more
conservative on how changes are rolled out to users, taking the
example rolling out cgroups v2 in the Fedora 31 time frame would
have broken all users that are using Docker to run their containers
and this was not acceptable :-).

If some users are getting confused and get curious about why there
are these differences and learn more about how Fedora CoreOS works,
that's a good thing IMO :-)


Confusing and frustrating your users is a bad thing.

On 5/19/21 6:54 AM, Neal Gompa wrote:
No. This is a cop-out and a bad answer. The reason this happened is 
because Fedora CoreOS historically has not participated in the 
development of Fedora Linux, including the Changes process, and 
generally rolled back features instead of adapting with them during 
the development cycle.


It's not like making changes and breaking upgrades is acceptable in 
Fedora Linux either. It's just that the Fedora CoreOS WG has not 
participated in the main development process and rolled back changes 
instead of adapting to them, which has frustrated pretty much 
everyone. The containers team in particular was extremely unhappy to 
find out cgroup v1 was still used in FCOS. I was pretty cheesed off 
when I discovered the sqlite rpmdb feature was rolled back in FCOS.


In general, I'm not pleased with how Fedora CoreOS does this. 
Hopefully they will do better in the future.


I'll echo Neal's sentiment here. This is a cop-out and bad answer.

It is frustrating to consume FCOS only to see features that are in the 
current release of Fedora are rolled back. Even in today's FCOS WG 
meeting I brought up adding in zswap to FCOS and it is shelved until 
Kubernetes adds for support swap enabled systems.


The RHCOS and Openshift teams should be back porting these breaking 
changes, so FCOS can look to the future with Fedora. FCOS should not be 
shackled by limits imposed by RHCOS/Openshift/Kubernetes.


Joe



--
Joe Doss
j...@solidadmin.com
___
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 on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora CoreOS stable stream now rebased to Fedora 34

2021-05-19 Thread Matthew Miller 
On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 12:38:58PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> Some strange stuff!

Yeah. You'll probably want to start by filtering by hits specifically to a
repo. Perhaps `repo_tag like "updates-released-f__"`. Otherwise you get
Fedora Linux and EPEL all mixed together.

-- 
Matthew Miller

Fedora Project Leader
___
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 on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora CoreOS stable stream now rebased to Fedora 34

2021-05-19 Thread Matthew Miller 
On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 07:22:37AM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 03:37:27PM -0400, Dusty Mabe wrote:
> > - DNF Count Me support for Fedora CoreOS [6].
> Are the count stats visible somewhere?

Yes, although just the aggregated count data without analysis. I'm working
on scripts to make reports and pretty graphs but they're not ready yet.
You can get the data from:

https://data-analysis.fedoraproject.org/csv-reports/countme/totals.db

and Will Wood's Jupyter notebook here 
https://github.com/wgwoods/fedora-countme-data
shows some examples in how to work with it.

-- 
Matthew Miller

Fedora Project Leader
___
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 on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora CoreOS stable stream now rebased to Fedora 34

2021-05-19 Thread Colin Walters 


On Wed, May 19, 2021, at 7:54 AM, Neal Gompa wrote:
> 
> It's not like making changes and breaking upgrades is acceptable in
> Fedora Linux either. It's just that the Fedora CoreOS WG has not
> participated in the main development process and rolled back changes
> instead of adapting to them, which has frustrated pretty much
> everyone. The containers team in particular was extremely unhappy to
> find out cgroup v1 was still used in FCOS. 

This was extensively discussed before: 
https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/373
And has been since multiple times.  I don't think rehashing it here is useful.  
Members from the github.com/containers team were definitely aware.

The bottom line is FCOS includes docker by default because Container Linux did 
and for other reasons.  That's different from other editions.

> I was pretty cheesed off
> when I discovered the sqlite rpmdb feature was rolled back in FCOS.

This one however was a great example of both teams (rpm team and rpm-ostree 
team) being unaware of the need to coordinate here.  The design for the 
migration that landed in rpm upstream fundamentally clashes with rpm-ostree's 
transactional model.  But this one is also now fixed in Fedora 34.

We're still dealing with further fallout from this in e.g. 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1938928 though because the FCOS 
team keeps our tooling and code tightly bound to RHCOS (RHEL8).
___
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 on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora CoreOS stable stream now rebased to Fedora 34

2021-05-19 Thread Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek 
On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 01:19:25PM +0200, Clement Verna wrote:
> On Wed, 19 May 2021 at 09:24, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek 
> wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 03:37:27PM -0400, Dusty Mabe wrote:
> > > - DNF Count Me support for Fedora CoreOS [6].
> >
> > Are the count stats visible somewhere?
> >
> 
> For FCOS this change is not yet enabled, it is coming in a few months (more
> info [0]).
> But the Count Me support was enabled on Sliverblue and IoT so we should be
> able to get better stats for these now :).
> 
> The raw data are available here[1] and
> 
> [0] -
> https://fedoramagazine.org/getting-better-at-counting-rpm-ostree-based-systems/
> [1] - https://data-analysis.fedoraproject.org/csv-reports/countme/

Thanks.

>>> set(f['os_name'])   
>>> 
Out[11]: 
{'09-Fedora-Gnome',
 'Alibaba Cloud Linux',
 'AlmaLinux',
 'Alpine Linux',
 'Amazon Linux',
 'Anolis OS',
 'Asianux Server',
 'BigCloud Enterprise Linux',
 'Bottlerocket',
 'Broken Fedora',
 'CAPS-OS',
 'CGS Linux',
 'CONFIDENTIAL PREVIEW \\xc2\\xab\\xc2\\xb1\\xc2\\xbb Hybrid 
Decisions\\xc2\\xae SaferOS\\xe2\\x84\\xa2',
 'Cake',
 'CentOS',
 'CentOS CAPS-OS',
 'CentOS Linux',
 'CentOS Linux CAPS-OS',
 'CentOS Linux release 8',
 'CentOS Release ',
 'CentOS Stream',
 'CentOS Stream v21.021   v21.021  v21.022',
 'CentOS Stream v21.027v21.027   v21.027 ',
 'CentOS Stream v21.032',
 'CentOS Stream v21.033  v21.033 v21.033v21.033   v21.033  v21.034',
 'CentOS Stream v21.036  v21.036 v21.036v21.036   
v21.036  v21.036 v21.036v21.036   v21.036  v21.036',
 'CentOS Stream v21.042v21.042   v21.042  v21.042   
  v21.042v21.042   v21.042  v21.042 v21.042v21.042  
 v21.042  v21.043',
 'CentOS Stream v21.057   v21.057  v21.057 
v21.057v21.057   v21.057  v21.057 v21.057   
 v21.057   v21.057  v21.057 v21.057v21.057   v21.057  
v21.057',
 'CentOS Stream v21.065 v21.065v21.065  
 v21.065  v21.065 v21.065v21.065
   v21.065  v21.065 v21.065v21.065   v21.065  
v21.065 v21.065v21.065   v21.065  v21.066',
 'CentOS Stream v21.067v21.067   v21.067
  v21.067 v21.067v21.067
   v21.067  v21.067 v21.067v21.067  
 v21.067  v21.067 v21.067v21.067   v21.067  
v21.067 v21.067v21.067   v21.067 ',
 'CentOS Stream v21.111 v21.111v21.111  
 v21.111  v21.111 v21.111   
 v21.111   v21.111  v21.111 v21.111 
   v21.111   v21.111  v21.111 v21.111
v21.111   v21.111  v21.111 v21.111v21.111   v21.111  v21.111',

Some strange stuff!

>>> f.groupby('os_name').sum().sort_values('hits').tail(20) 
>>> 
>>>
  hits  sys_age
os_name
Virtuozzo Linux454  153
Kontron TSN Starterkit 454  151
Private Void Enterprise Linux  522 1275
StaRT Linux563  195
NCRLinuxC  650  246
Syneto Juno711  254
UXCloud   1841 1136
SereneLinux   2032  534
Springdale Open Enterprise Linux  2677  529
Rocky Linux   3100   30
Fedora Remix for WSL  9337 2454
NST  11494 1798
CloudLinux   43267  695
Generic  74319 4587
AlmaLinux93186  335
Oracle Linux Server 316058 1880
CentOS Stream   803710 1429
Red Hat Enterprise Linux   3163541 6736
CentOS Linux  17082049 3929
Fedora60766448   190704

Zbyszek
___
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 on the list,

Re: Fedora CoreOS stable stream now rebased to Fedora 34

2021-05-19 Thread Neal Gompa 
On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 2:45 AM Clement Verna  wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, 19 May 2021 at 06:50, Tomasz Torcz  wrote:
>>
>> Dnia Tue, May 18, 2021 at 03:37:27PM -0400, Dusty Mabe napisał(a):
>> > Over the next two days we're rolling out the first Fedora 34 based
>> > Fedora CoreOS into the `stable` stream.
>> >
>> > - systemd-resolved is still enabled but not used yet [1]
>>
>>   This was Fedora 33 feature.
>>
>> > - Move to cgroup v2 by default [5].
>>
>>   This was Fedora 31 feature.
>>
>>   I was wondering: Fedora CoreOS actively undoes distribution-wide
>> changes (at least the two above, I remember lagging with iptables-nft
>> around Fedora 32).  End user may confused, seeing the list of changes
>> for the release X, but receiving only few of them with edition CoreOS X.
>>
>>   Should such divergence be allowed?  Should Fedora CoreOS use the same
>> version number while not containing all the changes from main Fedora Linux?
>
>
> I think this is the fundamental difference here, Fedora CoreOS does not have 
> a version number. It has 3 streams, stable, testing and next, these streams 
> are based on a version of Fedora Linux but that should just be a detail that 
> most end users should not have to care about.
> Another difference is that Fedora CoreOS has automatic updates and if we want 
> our users to trust these automatic updates we need them to be rock solid. 
> This leads to Fedora CoreOS being more conservative on how changes are rolled 
> out to users, taking the example rolling out cgroups v2 in the Fedora 31 time 
> frame would have broken all users that are using Docker to run their 
> containers and this was not acceptable :-).
>
>  If some users are getting confused and get curious about why there are these 
> differences and learn more about how Fedora CoreOS works, that's a good thing 
> IMO :-)

No. This is a cop-out and a bad answer. The reason this happened is
because Fedora CoreOS historically has not participated in the
development of Fedora Linux, including the Changes process, and
generally rolled back features instead of adapting with them during
the development cycle.

It's not like making changes and breaking upgrades is acceptable in
Fedora Linux either. It's just that the Fedora CoreOS WG has not
participated in the main development process and rolled back changes
instead of adapting to them, which has frustrated pretty much
everyone. The containers team in particular was extremely unhappy to
find out cgroup v1 was still used in FCOS. I was pretty cheesed off
when I discovered the sqlite rpmdb feature was rolled back in FCOS.

In general, I'm not pleased with how Fedora CoreOS does this.
Hopefully they will do better in the future.


-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
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 on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora CoreOS stable stream now rebased to Fedora 34

2021-05-19 Thread Clement Verna 
On Wed, 19 May 2021 at 09:24, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek 
wrote:

> On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 03:37:27PM -0400, Dusty Mabe wrote:
> > - DNF Count Me support for Fedora CoreOS [6].
>
> Are the count stats visible somewhere?
>

For FCOS this change is not yet enabled, it is coming in a few months (more
info [0]).
But the Count Me support was enabled on Sliverblue and IoT so we should be
able to get better stats for these now :).

The raw data are available here[1] and

[0] -
https://fedoramagazine.org/getting-better-at-counting-rpm-ostree-based-systems/
[1] - https://data-analysis.fedoraproject.org/csv-reports/countme/


> Zbyszek
> ___
> 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 on the list, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
>
___
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 on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora CoreOS stable stream now rebased to Fedora 34

2021-05-19 Thread Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek 
On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 03:37:27PM -0400, Dusty Mabe wrote:
> - DNF Count Me support for Fedora CoreOS [6].

Are the count stats visible somewhere?

Zbyszek
___
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 on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora CoreOS stable stream now rebased to Fedora 34

2021-05-19 Thread Clement Verna 
On Wed, 19 May 2021 at 06:50, Tomasz Torcz  wrote:

> Dnia Tue, May 18, 2021 at 03:37:27PM -0400, Dusty Mabe napisał(a):
> > Over the next two days we're rolling out the first Fedora 34 based
> > Fedora CoreOS into the `stable` stream.
> >
> > - systemd-resolved is still enabled but not used yet [1]
>
>   This was Fedora 33 feature.
>
> > - Move to cgroup v2 by default [5].
>
>   This was Fedora 31 feature.
>
>   I was wondering: Fedora CoreOS actively undoes distribution-wide
> changes (at least the two above, I remember lagging with iptables-nft
> around Fedora 32).  End user may confused, seeing the list of changes
> for the release X, but receiving only few of them with edition CoreOS X.
>
>   Should such divergence be allowed?  Should Fedora CoreOS use the same
> version number while not containing all the changes from main Fedora Linux?
>

I think this is the fundamental difference here, Fedora CoreOS does not
have a version number. It has 3 streams, stable, testing and next, these
streams are based on a version of Fedora Linux but that should just be a
detail that most end users should not have to care about.
Another difference is that Fedora CoreOS has automatic updates and if we
want our users to trust these automatic updates we need them to be rock
solid. This leads to Fedora CoreOS being more conservative on how changes
are rolled out to users, taking the example rolling out cgroups v2 in the
Fedora 31 time frame would have broken all users that are using Docker to
run their containers and this was not acceptable :-).

 If some users are getting confused and get curious about why there are
these differences and learn more about how Fedora CoreOS works, that's a
good thing IMO :-)


> --
> Tomasz Torcz  “If you try to upissue this patchset I shall be
> seeking
> to...@pipebreaker.pl   an IP-routable hand grenade.”  — Andrew Morton
> (LKML)
> ___
> 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 on the list, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
>
___
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 on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora CoreOS stable stream now rebased to Fedora 34

2021-05-18 Thread Tomasz Torcz 
Dnia Tue, May 18, 2021 at 03:37:27PM -0400, Dusty Mabe napisał(a):
> Over the next two days we're rolling out the first Fedora 34 based
> Fedora CoreOS into the `stable` stream. 
>  
> - systemd-resolved is still enabled but not used yet [1]

  This was Fedora 33 feature.

> - Move to cgroup v2 by default [5].

  This was Fedora 31 feature.

  I was wondering: Fedora CoreOS actively undoes distribution-wide
changes (at least the two above, I remember lagging with iptables-nft
around Fedora 32).  End user may confused, seeing the list of changes
for the release X, but receiving only few of them with edition CoreOS X.

  Should such divergence be allowed?  Should Fedora CoreOS use the same
version number while not containing all the changes from main Fedora Linux?

-- 
Tomasz Torcz  “If you try to upissue this patchset I shall be 
seeking
to...@pipebreaker.pl   an IP-routable hand grenade.”  — Andrew Morton (LKML)
___
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 on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Fedora CoreOS stable stream now rebased to Fedora 34

2021-05-18 Thread Dusty Mabe 
Over the next two days we're rolling out the first Fedora 34 based
Fedora CoreOS into the `stable` stream. 
 
Some notable issues/configurations:

- Very old systems (Fedora 32 and earlier) may not be able to update [0]
- systemd-resolved is still enabled but not used yet [1]

Here are some highlights of recently added features in Fedora CoreOS:

- The `/boot` partition is now mounted read-only.
- This continues the work to protect more of the OS from accidental damage.
- It is now possible to configure boot disk RAID 1 mirroring via Ignition [2].
- Better introspection into the state of Zincati (the update agent) from 
`rpm-ostree status`.
- Better support for disk encryption.
- Initial (non-automatic) support for updating the bootloader. [3]

Here are some new features landing in the coming months:

- Support for specifying kernel arguments via Ignition [4].
- Move to cgroup v2 by default [5].
- DNF Count Me support for Fedora CoreOS [6].

Thanks to everyone who participated in the test day [7] and to everyone that
run the `testing` and `next` streams to help us identify and fix issues
before they get to `stable`.

Dusty Mabe, for the Fedora CoreOS team

[0] 
https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/749#issuecomment-843446996
[1] https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/834
[2] 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora-coreos/storage/#_reconfiguring_the_root_filesystem
[3] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora-coreos/bootloader-updates/
[4] https://github.com/coreos/ignition/issues/1168
[5] https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/292
[6] https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/717
[7] https://testdays.fedoraproject.org/events/113
___
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 on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure