Re: Vagrant mounting /var/lib/docker?

[Jason Brooks]

- Original Message -
 From: Joe Brockmeier j...@redhat.com
 To: Jason Brooks jbro...@redhat.com, Fedora Cloud SIG 
 cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
 Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2015 12:19:32 PM
 Subject: Re: Vagrant mounting /var/lib/docker?
 
 On 03/17/2015 03:18 PM, Jason Brooks wrote:
  I don't know if this is any easier than adding a virtual disk, adding
  that as a physical volume, extending the root logical vol, and resizing
  the partition. Although, when I type it all out like that...
 
 Right. :-) Was trying to just make this as easy as mounting a local
 directory...

Still, it might be simpler in the end. If things aren't working, it
could make for mysterious debugging 

 --
 Joe Brockmeier | Project Atomic Doer of Things
 j...@redhat.com | http://community.redhat.com/
 Twitter: @jzb  | http://dissociatedpress.net/
 
 
 ___
 cloud mailing list
 cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
 Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
 
___
cloud mailing list
cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: Cloud SIG meeting minutes (2015-03-18)

[Jason Brooks]

 
 
 Action Items
 
 * jzb help find scollier additional maintainer for dockerfiles

On this item, I believe that the CentOS folks are interested 
in working together on Dockerfiles maintenance. Perhaps
CentOS Dockerfiles and Fedora Dockerfiles could live together
under Project Atomic?

Jason

___
cloud mailing list
cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: Atomic 2 Week Proposal

[Jason Brooks]

- Original Message -
 From: Matthew Miller mat...@fedoraproject.org
 To: Fedora Cloud SIG cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
 Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2015 4:10:40 PM
 Subject: Atomic 2 Week Proposal
 
 On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 03:00:05PM -0400, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Cloud/Atomic-2-Week-Proposal
 
 One thing to think about, not necessarily as a blocker or to tie this
 up, but related to the effect section With the product/edition
 strategy, we're trying to make nice, tailored elevator pitches for
 each. Fedora Workstation is the best desktop for software developers.
 Fedora Server makes it easy to manage small server environments with
 pushbutton deployment of complex services. Fedora Atomic runs
 containerized applications.
 
 The Fedora Cloud Base image is a great place to start for just about
 _anything_ you want to build up in a cloud environment, but what can we
 offer beyond that? If you're already planning on using Fedora and then
 want a cloud guest image, it's perfect, but what's the hook for using
 Fedora rather than some other Linux base?

It's the Linux base that workstation, server and atomic have in 
common, so it's a natural choice for users of those products who
need a minimal, open-ended Linux base.

Jason


 
 
 
 --
 Matthew Miller
 mat...@fedoraproject.org
 Fedora Project Leader
 ___
 cloud mailing list
 cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
 Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
 
___
cloud mailing list
cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: docker-storage-setup fails on F22 cloud image

[Jason Brooks]

- Original Message -
 From: Dusty Mabe du...@dustymabe.com
 To: cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
 Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2015 7:28:27 AM
 Subject: docker-storage-setup fails on F22 cloud image
 
 
 docker-storage-setup fails on our cloud image because there is no storage for
 it
 to configure. In my case I am just testing on openstack with no ephemeral
 disks
 attached to the instance.
 
 All you need to do to show this is install and start docker and then
 you will see:
 
 [root@f22 ~]# systemctl status docker-storage-setup
 ● docker-storage-setup.service - Docker Storage Setup
Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/docker-storage-setup.service;
disabled; vendor preset: disabled)
Active: failed (Result: exit-code) since Wed 2015-08-05 14:15:14 UTC; 4min
3s ago
   Process: 6951 ExecStart=/usr/bin/docker-storage-setup (code=exited,
   status=3)
  Main PID: 6951 (code=exited, status=3)
 
 Aug 05 14:15:14 f22 docker-storage-setup[6951]: WARNING: Failed to connect to
 lvmetad. Falling back to internal scanning.
 Aug 05 14:15:14 f22 docker-storage-setup[6951]: Metadata volume
 docker-poolmeta already exists. Not creating a new one.
 Aug 05 14:15:14 f22 docker-storage-setup[6951]: /run/lvm/lvmetad.socket:
 connect failed: No such file or directory
 Aug 05 14:15:14 f22 docker-storage-setup[6951]: WARNING: Failed to connect to
 lvmetad. Falling back to internal scanning.
 Aug 05 14:15:14 f22 docker-storage-setup[6951]: Please provide a volume group
 name
 Aug 05 14:15:14 f22 docker-storage-setup[6951]: Run `lvcreate --help' for
 more information.
 Aug 05 14:15:14 f22 systemd[1]: docker-storage-setup.service: main process
 exited, code=exited, status=3/NOTIMPLEMENTED
 Aug 05 14:15:14 f22 systemd[1]: Failed to start Docker Storage Setup.
 Aug 05 14:15:14 f22 systemd[1]: Unit docker-storage-setup.service entered
 failed state.
 Aug 05 14:15:14 f22 systemd[1]: docker-storage-setup.service failed.
 
 
 Should we fix this so that there isn't a failed unit if there is no storage
 to configure?

Can we do something like -- don't try to run unless there's an uncommented
line in docker-storage-setup... ?

Jason


 
 Dusty
 ___
 cloud mailing list
 cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
 Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
 
___
cloud mailing list
cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: [DISCUSS] Making Atomic the cloud edition

[Jason Brooks]

- Original Message -
 From: Matt Micene nzwul...@gmail.com
 To: Fedora Cloud SIG cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
 Sent: Friday, August 21, 2015 6:49:18 AM
 Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Making Atomic the cloud edition
 
 Given:
 
   jzb
 
 Given that a great deal of interesting work is going into the Fedora
  Atomic host, we'd like to make Atomic the main deliverable/focus for the
  Cloud Working Group and Cloud edition.
 
 
 and
 
 mattdm
 
 For that, we need the Cloud Base to have *internal* visibility and
  connections, but it doesn't need to confuse the marketing message.
 
 
 I think moving the focus of Cloud SIG to focus on Atomic would confuse
 folks more than the currently slim messaging around the Cloud SIG goals.  I
 think CentOS has the right approach with a separate Atomic SIG, and I
 propose that we follow that model.  Split Atomic into it's own SIG,
 continue the Cloud SIG to focus on cloud things.
 
 Atomic is a new way of doing everything.  OS management changes, package
 management changes, Docker + K8S + Nulecule + Atomicapp + ? + ? + ?.  We
 are trying to move at a much more rapid pace than the rest of the Fedora
 Project products (see the 2 week release proposal).  We are breaking things
 at a much more rapid pace than other products as well.  Lots of initial
 answers on ask / IRC wind up as, update the tree see if it's still
 broken.
 
 I  don't think that if you say the word cloud in a room of IT folks
 today, that over 1% are going to think Atomic.  They think OpenStack,
 OpenShift, CloudFoundry, Eucalyptus, AWS, ownCloud, etc.  Fedora as
 foundation, Fedora as tenant, Fedora as a Service!  The new Cloud SIG draft
 reflects those use cases: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Cloud_SIG-new-draft.
 Fedora saying well when *we* say cloud we mean Atomic not what you think
 and having to explain it doesn't sound like a win.

Thanks for pointing to this doc (though I see now that it was
last updated in 2013). It's a pretty ambitious set of goals --
esp things like getting various IaaS platforms running on Fedora.

An important question is what our contributor base wants to work on --
I haven't seen much mention of things like getting IaaS running on 
Fedora in the cloud sig meetings.

For the cloud image itself, I don't fully understand why I'd want
a specialized cloud image over a minimal Fedora image -- being 
on Amazon and making minimal, but otherwise stock Fedora images 
available feels like a core distro task to me. 

It's true, though, that CentOS has both Cloud and Atomic SIGs, both
with plenty to do, so that model might fit here, as well. No need to 
wrench the SIG away from non-atomic matters if that's where the SIG 
contributors want to place their efforts. The question is, where do
the SIG members wish to focus... I guess that's what this thread
is about.

Jason

 
 And while there's overlap in uses like cloud-init, Atomic is much more
 likely to want a completely new compatible implementation because the
 dependency tree makes maintenance more complex than a Fedora OpenStack
 guest image will need to care about.  (See my previous rants on sizing ;-)
 ).  Or a Fedora Server optimized for running nova-compute.  The Cloud Base
 Image and the Atomic host or the Docker Base Image don't and shouldn't have
 much in common because the use cases are different.
 
 I do think that the Cloud SIG does need better messaging about its intents
 and goals.  The new SIG draft looks like a step in the right direction to
 me.  Define major focus areas (run IaaS on Fedora, run Fedora in IaaS, etc)
 then layer in use cases and projects from the group.
 
 A new Atomic SIG would focus on stabilizing the Atomic host, the delivery
 process, and the Docker base image.  Atomic hosts are all about running
 Docker workloads, so that makes sense to couple.  As containerization
 grows, I could see the need for moving Docker image management somewhere
 else.
 
 Did I miss the 72 hr window?
 
 - matt m
 
 
 On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 12:05 PM, Matthew Miller mat...@fedoraproject.org
 wrote:
 
  On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 08:04:33PM +0530, Lalatendu Mohanty wrote:
   Does it mean that we are assuming that we have considerable users
   using current fedora atomic image
   or considerable users using the cloud image mostly for running
   containers and going to increase in future ?
   I understand that Atomic host having newer technology which is
   better for a world of containers but just want to make sure the
   decision is driven by user needs.
 
  I'm at LinuxCon, which is also at the same time CloudOpen and
  ContainerCon. The sample size is small and the audience skewed, but:
  I've talked to several (three) people using/testing Fedora Atomic, at
  least one of them fairly seriously; no one using Cloud Base image.
 
  That's not to say that they don't exist (hi there!), but I think user
  interest/excitement around Atomic is clear. Perhaps more crucially as
  we make this plan, I think the people who want 

Re: [DISCUSS] Making Atomic the cloud edition

[Jason Brooks]

- Original Message -
 From: Joe Brockmeier j...@redhat.com
 To: Fedora Cloud SIG cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
 Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 3:54:16 PM
 Subject: [DISCUSS] Making Atomic the cloud edition
 

 
 Given that a great deal of interesting work is going into the Fedora
 Atomic host, we'd like to make Atomic the main deliverable/focus for the
 Cloud Working Group and Cloud edition.
 

+1 This gives Fedora Cloud a great First story to tell.


 
 Finally, we also discussed that the host was only part of the larger
 effort - we also need to pour some attention into improving the Docker
 image, making that smaller and a better option.

+1 It would be great if the Fedora image could really challenge some
of these ultralight options in size.

Jason


 
___
cloud mailing list
cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: RC* Atomic images are broken

[Jason Brooks]

- Original Message -
> From: "Dusty Mabe" 
> To: cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2015 1:11:45 PM
> Subject: Re: RC* Atomic images are broken
> 
> On 10/28/2015 06:45 PM, Dusty Mabe wrote:
> > We found out today that all RC images for Atomic are broken. They are
> > building against a much older yum repo (the beta repos) and thus have
> > a very old systemd, which has some breakages with ostree. dgilmore and
> > maxamillion have done some investigation and believe they have
> > somewhat pinpointed the issue, although I don't know if they know of
> > an exact fix yet.
> >
> > This would have been caught by tunir/autocloud but tunir skips this
> > test for atomic images. I have submitted a PR for it to not do that [1].
> >
> > Right now the last booting atomic image is TC11. If we don't do
> > another compose then we won't have an atomic image for release.
> >
> 
> Due to some heroics by dgilmore we worked together last night and
> figured out how to work around this issue for now. That means we have
> some images to test and I think they have the right content. I would
> appreciate it if as many people as possible would grab some of these and
> test.

I tested the vagrant-libvirt atomic image. I'm unable to apply a 
provisioning script from my Vagrantfile. Vagrant can't copy my script to 
the VM, apparently because /sysroot/tmp has more restrictive permissions 
here than it did in the f22 image, 755 vs 777.

a bit more info here:

http://fpaste.org/285008/14461527/


Regards, Jason

> 
> http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/23_RC9/Cloud_Images/x86_64/Images/
> 
> Thanks to imcleod, maxamillion, and roshi for helping out as well!
> 
> 
> ___
> cloud mailing list
> cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
> Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
> 
___
cloud mailing list
cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: Alternatives to cloud-init (was Re: [DISCUSS] Cloud and Server Workgroup relationship)

[Jason Brooks]

> 
> However another important point to make here is that "run a cloud image
> locally
> in libvirt on a workstation" is basically the use case for Vagrant - it does
> things
> like detecting the IP address so you can `vagrant ssh` etc.

+1000 

I'm trying to reproduce an issue in a not-vagrant-but-should-be-vagrant 
environment right now, and I'm tearing my hair out missing it.

> 
> ___
> cloud mailing list
> cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
> Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
> 
___
cloud mailing list
cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: [DISCUSS] Cloud and Server Workgroup relationship

[Jason Brooks]

- Original Message -
> From: "Joe Brockmeier" 
> To: "Fedora Cloud SIG" , 
> ser...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2015 11:43:27 AM
> Subject: [DISCUSS] Cloud and Server Workgroup relationship
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> During today's Cloud Working Group meeting we had a short but spirited
> discussion on the roles of the Cloud and Server Working Group and the
> editions we're producing.
> 
> I wanted to open a discussion on that topic (see also [1]) ahead of
> planning for F24 to see if the current setup makes sense, how we can
> collaborate, and so forth. I have opinions but I want to kick off a
> discussion without starting from a specific viewpoint.
> 
> And... go!

My two cents: I'm looking at Fedora's editions with certain 
expectations. I see Workstation, and I know what I'm going to 
get and where I expect it to run. I see Server, and I expect:

* a fairly minimal image
* something I can run on bare metal, VM or cloud

Instead, Server is a big image (2.1GB) that's not supposed to be run
in the cloud. 

Or, I assume I can rough something out w/ vagrant in VMs, and then
deploy that on metal, but in Fedora, those are different variants,
and things like LVM vs. no LVM (if I recall correctly) come into 
play, and there's no vagrant box for Fedora Server, because that's
a cloud thing (I guess??). A no-cloud rule for Fedora Server feels 
antiquated and weird to me. 

It's not the end of the world that my expected Fedora Server edition
is in reality split into two separate editions, Server and Cloud,
but I've seen it mentioned that Cloud Edition adoption has been slow --
it might be more findable for people if it's presented with or 
somehow integrated with the Server Edition.

Finally, I think that the movement of Fedora Atomic has been a 
bit slow, and I've witnessed the confusion of having cloud-base
and atomic smushed together (in mtgs & such). If running well in 
cloud environments was part of the Server WG charter, and atomic 
was the focus in the Cloud WG, that'd be a cleaner arrangement. But,
maybe this just means that atomic needs its own SIG (or WG -- I'm
not 100% clear on the difference).

Of course, just because some might expect the Editions to work a 
certain way doesn't mean that this is the right way to do it, and
I know that many things went into the definition of the WGs the
way there are.

Regards, Jason


> 
> [1] https://fedorahosted.org/cloud/ticket/127
> --
> Joe Brockmeier | Community Team, OSAS
> j...@redhat.com | http://community.redhat.com/
> Twitter: @jzb  | http://dissociatedpress.net/
> 
> 
> ___
> server mailing list
> ser...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/server
___
cloud mailing list
cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: Atomic Host and the kernel

[Jason Brooks]

- Original Message -
 From: Josh Boyer jwbo...@fedoraproject.org
 To: Fedora Cloud SIG cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
 Cc: Colin Walters walt...@redhat.com
 Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2015 2:09:23 PM
 Subject: Atomic Host and the kernel
 
 Hi All,
 
 I'm emailing my questions on the topic here as it seems to be the best
 Fedora focused place to discuss Atomic Host and kernel interaction.
 If that isn't the case, please point me to where you believe that is.

atomic-de...@projectatomic.io is another good place

 
 I have two basic questions around the interaction of Atomic Host and
 the kernel.  The first is fairly straightforward: is there anything
 Atomic Host or the atomic toolset needs that the kernel does not
 provide today?  Missing features, bugs that have been hit but not
 fixed, etc.  I believe the answer is likely no, given that atomic is
 off and running fine and leverages hardlinks but I thought I would
 ask.

I don't think so -- I haven't heard of any such needs...

 
 The second question is a bit more involved.  Atomic provides the nice
 ability for rollback across the entire OS tree.  However, that
 requires an atomic image to be spun for every instance of that tree.
 That, naturally, means that whenever a new Atomic Host instance is
 spun it will use whatever kernel happens to be the latest in the
 Fedora release it is built from.  This means that one cannot leverage
 the nice side effect of being able to update the kernel independently
 of userspace.  (Which is also nice from a testing perspective when it
 comes to kernels and regressions.)
 
 To my understanding, the only way to provide such testing would be to
 create Atomic Host images that only deviate from the official images
 in that they provide a new kernel.  Then one could use the standard
 atomic tools to do testing and rollback of _only_ the kernel if a
 problem is detected.  While this is certainly possible, I'm not sure
 it is something the Cloud sig (or whomever) is really interested in
 doing.  On the kernel side, we could provide such images built on our
 own but I'm not sure the effort or duplication of
 tooling/infrastructure is worthwhile overall.  Particularly when
 non-atomic Rawhide continues to be flexible enough for these purposes.

My first thought is that the kernel in an atomic host should just 
work, dammit! :)

There could be different trees reflecting different levels of
kernel maturity. If it's to be one tree, multiple kernels
shipping together, as you mention below, might be the best option --
there's still a grub menu, for choosing, but I'm not positive if
there'd be a conflict w/ any ostree rollback fu.

Jason

 
 With a two week image release timeframe though, being able to use
 different kernels might be a good idea.  Does anyone have any thoughts
 around this topic and how to possibly accomplish such testing?  The
 only other idea I had was to spin the Atomic Host images containing
 the last 3 kernels in them, but I am not sure if choosing between them
 at boot is currently possible with multiple kernels installed.
 
 Thanks in advance.
 
 josh
 ___
 cloud mailing list
 cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
 Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
 
___
cloud mailing list
cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: F23 beta vagrant box issues

[Jason Brooks]

- Original Message -
> From: "Dusty Mabe" 
> To: cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Tuesday, September 8, 2015 2:54:06 PM
> Subject: F23 beta vagrant box issues
> 
> We have had several people report issues with the F23 beta vagrant box
> [1]. I see this in the log file under /var/log/libvirt/qemu/:
> 
> KVM internal error. Suberror: 1
> emulation failure
> 
> Can some more people try this and report if it is successful and if not
> let us know if you get the same errors in the log files.

Same issue here w/ vagrant and libvirt on f23.

Log at: http://fpaste.org/264944/75042514/


> 
> Thanks,
> Dusty
> 
> [1] -
> http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/23_Beta_TC4/Cloud_Images/x86_64/Images/Fedora-Cloud-Base-Vagrant-23_Beta_TC4-20150907.x86_64.vagrant-libvirt.box
> 
> 
> ___
> cloud mailing list
> cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
> Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
> 
___
cloud mailing list
cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: Two-Week Atomic actual deliverables

[Jason Brooks]

- Original Message -
> From: "Matthew Miller" 
> To: "Fedora Cloud SIG" 
> Sent: Friday, September 11, 2015 8:59:55 AM
> Subject: Re: Two-Week Atomic actual deliverables
> 
> On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 01:02:10PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > * Vagrant boxes:
> >   - same tunir-based test suite in VM environemnt
> 
> Followup! Kushal points out that we are testing the KVM vagrant images
> in this way, but not testing VirtualBox. (Because we don't have
> VirtualBox in Fedora or EPEL, because out-of-tree kernel modules.).
> Like the qcow2->ec2 thing, these are the same bits as something that
> _is_ autotested, but run in a different environment. Unlike qcow2->ec2,
> we aren't even doing a boot test.
> 
> 
> Things which could go wrong which I see are:
> 
> * some VirtualBox-specific thing with booting an updated kernel or
>   grub2 (for example, updated kernel missing some drivers or something
>   that VirtualBox needs)
> 
> * some corruption or something in the image conversion
> 
> These seem mostly unlikely, but far from impossible.
> 
> 
> Since VirtualBox is the format the vast majority of Vagrant users will
> want, that's... kind of a big deal. *sigh* Options I can see here are:
> 
> A) Scramble to find some way to do the VirtualBox testing.

I'm in favor of A. We want to reach as many people as possible,
put free software in the hands of those toiling under proprietary
systems and what have you...

> 
> B) Don't publish the VirtualBox images.
> 
> C) Publish the VirtualBox images, but put them in a Penalty Box with
>extra warnings
> 
> Any other ideas? Preferences? B seems the most responsible, yet also
> the most sad. A would be highly unusual for our infrastructure. C could
> expose us to looking bad if support breaks and no one notices.
> 
> --
> Matthew Miller
> 
> Fedora Project Leader
> ___
> cloud mailing list
> cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
> Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
> 
___
cloud mailing list
cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: Mo's proposed fedora atomic logo

[Jason Brooks]

- Original Message -
> From: "Matthew Miller" 
> To: "Fedora Cloud SIG" 
> Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2015 11:23:54 AM
> Subject: Mo's proposed fedora atomic logo
> 
> https://mattdm.fedorapeople.org/misc/newfedoratomiclogomockup.png
> 
> With Fedora Atomic Host as primary, the current Fedora Cloud logo would
> be still used for the Cloud Base image, but would probably be
> de-colored (see the non-Edition logos on https://arm.fedoraproject.org/
> for an example).
> 
> Feedback? I think it looks great.

+1 excellent

> 
> --
> Matthew Miller
> 
> Fedora Project Leader
> ___
> cloud mailing list
> cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
> Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
> 
___
cloud mailing list
cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: 2 week Atomic Host release ready for testing

[Jason Brooks]

- Original Message -
> From: "Joe Brockmeier" 
> To: cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2015 12:05:08 PM
> Subject: Re: 2 week Atomic Host release ready for testing
> 
> On 09/10/2015 02:21 PM, Michael McGrath wrote:
> > Latest Atomic Host build is ready for testing:
> 
> Any reason not to put this up on the Atomic blog (with the caveat that
> this is not considered "ready for prime time")?

If you download the official f22 atomic image and update it,
you get this same set of components. So, it's already prime
time? 

> 
> > http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/fedora-atomic/images/testing/
> > 
> > kernel: 4.1.6-200
> > docker: 1.7.1-8
> > etcd: 2.0.13-2
> > kubernetes: 1.1.0-0.5
> > cloud-init: 0.7.6-3
> > ostree: 2015.6-2
> > atomic: 1.1-1
> > 
> > -Mike
> > ___
> > cloud mailing list
> > cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
> > Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
> > 
> 
> 
> --
> Joe Brockmeier | Community Team, OSAS
> j...@redhat.com | http://community.redhat.com/
> Twitter: @jzb  | http://dissociatedpress.net/
> 
> 
> ___
> cloud mailing list
> cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
> Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
> 
___
cloud mailing list
cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: [DRAFT] Fedora 2 week Atomic Announcement

[Jason Brooks]

- Original Message -
> From: "Joe Brockmeier" 
> To: "Fedora Cloud SIG" 
> Sent: Thursday, December 3, 2015 2:46:23 PM
> Subject: [DRAFT] Fedora 2 week Atomic Announcement
> 
> Hey all,
> 
> Please take a look at this and let me know if there are any problems:
> 
> http://fpaste.org/297228/

I'm assuming you'll have links in there.

It might be good to include some reference to:

vagrant init fedora/23-atomic-host && vagrant up 

> 
> I would like to put this up on Project Atomic's blog and maybe the
> Fedora Magazine (in slightly altered form) quickly. I will probably
> break my own rule and post this on the Atomic blog Friday, and then try
> to get a longer and more substantive post on Fedora Magazine on Monday.
> 
> Best,
> 
> jzb
> --
> Joe Brockmeier | Community Team, OSAS
> j...@redhat.com | http://community.redhat.com/
> Twitter: @jzb  | http://dissociatedpress.net/
> 
> 
> ___
> cloud mailing list
> cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
> http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
> 
___
cloud mailing list
cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: [DRAFT] Fedora 2 week Atomic Announcement

[Jason Brooks]

- Original Message -
> From: "Joe Brockmeier" <j...@redhat.com>
> To: cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Friday, December 4, 2015 5:47:14 AM
> Subject: Re: [DRAFT] Fedora 2 week Atomic Announcement
> 
> On 12/03/2015 05:57 PM, Jason Brooks wrote:
> > I'm assuming you'll have links in there.
> 
> That's a good assumption. :-)
> 
> > It might be good to include some reference to:
> > 
> > vagrant init fedora/23-atomic-host && vagrant up
> 
> Are we pushing the latest box to Atlas now?

I see that this is already pubbed, but, yes. :)

Dusty did it this week, I believe.

> 
> Best,
> 
> jzb
> --
> Joe Brockmeier | Community Team, OSAS
> j...@redhat.com | http://community.redhat.com/
> Twitter: @jzb  | http://dissociatedpress.net/
> 
> 
> ___
> cloud mailing list
> cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
> http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
> 
___
cloud mailing list
cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: root on btrfs and lvmthinp for docker backing confusion

[Jason Brooks]

- Original Message -
> From: "Chris Murphy" 
> To: "Fedora Cloud SIG" 
> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2015 12:39:26 AM
> Subject: root on btrfs and lvmthinp for docker backing confusion
> 
> OK instead of hijacking some other thread...(sorta too late).
> 
> # lsblk -f
> NAME  FSTYPE  LABEL UUID
> MOUNTPOINT
> sda
> =E2=94=9C=E2=94=80sda1vfat  5956-63D8
> /boot/efi
> =E2=94=9C=E2=94=80sda2btrfs   f23a
> 8b0c4840-4fc7-4782-a4c0-25fec8a40dd4   /sysroot
> =E2=94=9C=E2=94=80sda3ext4
> 908cb4df-410b-47e4-afb1-872255bd1244   /boot
> =E2=94=9C=E2=94=80sda4LVM2_member
> 9WkBEW-XwcN-8f99-nQOP-E1w8-QiBs-6Xio7a
> =E2=94=94=E2=94=80sda5swap
> 53f95874-06db-4433-a74b-8dc31105c528   [SWAP]
> 
> -bash-4.3# pvs
>   PV VG   Fmt  Attr PSize   PFree
>   /dev/sda4  VG   lvm2 a--  426.51g 126.36g
> -bash-4.3# vgs
>   VG   #PV #LV #SN Attr   VSize   VFree
>   VG 1   1   0 wz--n- 426.51g 126.36g
> -bash-4.3# lvs
>   LV  VG   Attr   LSize   Pool Origin Data%  Meta%  Move
> Log Cpy%Sync Convert
>   docker-pool VG   twi-a-tz-- 300.00g 0.00   0.44
> 
> 
> What I'd like to know how to do, is get docker to use the thin pool
> setup here as backing, instead of Btrfs.
> 
> What I tried:
> 
> # cp /usr/lib/docker-storage-setup/docker-storage-setup
> /etc/sysconfig/docker-storage-setup
> 
> I then edited that file making one change such that VG=3DVG since that's
> the name of the VG. So it still says to use
> STORAGE_DRIVER=3Ddevicemapper.
> 
> 
> # systemctl status docker-storage-setup
> =E2=97=8F docker-storage-setup.service - Docker Storage Setup
>Loaded: loaded
> (/usr/lib/systemd/system/docker-storage-setup.service; enabled; vendor
> preset: disabled)
>Active: inactive (dead) since Thu 2015-12-10 01:09:06 MST; 45s ago
>   Process: 8008 ExecStart=3D/usr/bin/docker-storage-setup (code=3Dexited,
> status=3D0/SUCCESS)
>  Main PID: 8008 (code=3Dexited, status=3D0/SUCCESS)
> 
> Dec 10 01:09:05 f23a.localdomain systemd[1]: Starting Docker Storage Setup.=
> ..
> Dec 10 01:09:05 f23a.localdomain docker-storage-setup[8008]: INFO:
> Volume group backing root filesystem could not be determined
> Dec 10 01:09:06 f23a.localdomain docker-storage-setup[8008]: Logical
> volume "docker-pool" changed.
> Dec 10 01:09:06 f23a.localdomain systemd[1]: Started Docker Storage Setup.
> 
> 
> # systemctl status docker
> =E2=97=8F docker.service - Docker Application Container Engine
>Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/docker.service; enabled;
> vendor preset: disabled)
>   Drop-In: /usr/lib/systemd/system/docker.service.d
>=E2=94=94=E2=94=80flannel.conf
>Active: failed (Result: exit-code) since Thu 2015-12-10 01:09:06 MST; 48=
> s ago
>  Docs: http://docs.docker.com
>   Process: 8032 ExecStart=3D/usr/bin/docker daemon $OPTIONS
> $DOCKER_STORAGE_OPTIONS $DOCKER_NETWORK_OPTIONS $INSECURE_REGISTRY
> (code=3Dexited, status=3D1/FAILURE)
>  Main PID: 8032 (code=3Dexited, status=3D1/FAILURE)
> 
> Dec 10 01:09:06 f23a.localdomain systemd[1]: Starting Docker
> Application Container Engine...
> Dec 10 01:09:06 f23a.localdomain docker[8032]:
> time=3D"2015-12-10T01:09:06.240354137-07:00" level=3Dinfo
> msg=3D"[graphdriver] using prior storage driver \"btrfs\""
> Dec 10 01:09:06 f23a.localdomain docker[8032]:
> time=3D"2015-12-10T01:09:06.249931298-07:00" level=3Dfatal msg=3D"Error
> starting daemon: SELinux is not supporte...h driver"
> Dec 10 01:09:06 f23a.localdomain systemd[1]: docker.service: Main
> process exited, code=3Dexited, status=3D1/FAILURE
> Dec 10 01:09:06 f23a.localdomain systemd[1]: Failed to start Docker
> Application Container Engine.
> Dec 10 01:09:06 f23a.localdomain systemd[1]: docker.service: Unit
> entered failed state.
> Dec 10 01:09:06 f23a.localdomain systemd[1]: docker.service: Failed
> with result 'exit-code'.
> Hint: Some lines were ellipsized, use -l to show in full.
> 
> 
> So there's a disconnect between docker-storage-setup, which is set to
> use devicemapper and the volume group named VG, and docker.service
> which continues to use the btrfs driver (and then fails for the known
> reason that --selinux-enabled is set by default and that's not yet
> working until the automatic chcon patch lands).
> 
> In the meantime I can just remove --selinux-enabled. But I'd like to
> know how to redirect docker to use lvm thinp if that's possible.

You can ignore docker-storage-setup and edit /etc/sysconfig/docker-storage
yourself.

Here's what it looks like from the f23 vagrant box:

DOCKER_STORAGE_OPTIONS=-s devicemapper --storage-opt dm.fs=xfs --storage-opt 
dm.thinpooldev=/dev/mapper/atomicos-docker--pool --storage-opt 
dm.use_deferred_removal=true

Jason

> 
> --
> Chris Murphy
> ___
> cloud mailing list
> 

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
 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

Re: [openstack-dev] [magnum] Discussion of supporting single/multiple OS distro

[Jason Brooks]

> > 
> > There is some history behind that. There is a bug report for it here:
> > 
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1291860
> 
> Well sort of, it explains where the source for the package is coming from but
> it doesn't really help me understand whether I should trust the package
> versioning (1.1.0) or the versioning the packaged code reports (1.0.6) in

It's really 1.0.6, and yes, it's really confusing.

Jason
___
cloud mailing list
cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: [atomic-devel] Fedora Atomic Host Two Week Release Announcement

[Jason Brooks]

On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 7:28 AM, Colin Walters  wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2016, at 04:59 PM, nore...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
>>
>> A new update of Fedora Cloud Atomic Host has been released and can be
>> downloaded at:
>>
>> Images can be found here:
>>
>> https://getfedora.org/en/cloud/download/atomic.html
>>
>> Respective signed CHECKSUM files can be found here:
>> https://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/atomic/stable/CloudImages/x86_64/images/Fedora-CloudImages-24-20160721.0-x86_64-CHECKSUM
>> https://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/atomic/stable/Atomic/x86_64/iso/Fedora-Atomic-24-20160721.0-x86_64-CHECKSUM
>
> Why does this still have
> rpm-ostree-2015.11-2.fc24.x86_64
> when
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-bfecf6abed
> went stable 2 weeks ago?

We're using an old tree to make the images, I think this PR would fix it:

https://pagure.io/fedora-kickstarts/pull-request/38

>
___
cloud mailing list
cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org

Minutes from 7/20

[Jason Brooks]

==
#fedora-meeting-1: fedora_cloud_wg
==


Meeting started by jbrooks at 17:00:08 UTC. The full logs are available
at
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2016-07-20/fedora_cloud_wg.2016-07-20-17.00.log.html
.



Meeting summary
---
* Roll Call  (jbrooks, 17:00:17)

* discuss Post-GA Cadence  (jbrooks, 17:02:39)
  * LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/cloud/ticket/155   (jbrooks,
17:03:01)
  * LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/cloud/ticket/138   (kushal, 17:09:32)
  * ACTION: jbrooks to update / run down issues around two-week repo
(jbrooks, 17:23:22)

* issue 136 https://fedorahosted.org/cloud/ticket/136  (jbrooks,
  17:25:01)

* other open items  (jbrooks, 17:28:12)

* open floor  (jbrooks, 17:38:57)

Meeting ended at 17:57:09 UTC.




Action Items

* jbrooks to update / run down issues around two-week repo




Action Items, by person
---
* jbrooks
  * jbrooks to update / run down issues around two-week repo
* **UNASSIGNED**
  * (none)




People Present (lines said)
---
* jbrooks (64)
* dustymabe (57)
* kushal (42)
* jberkus (35)
* maxamillion (20)
* zodbot (17)
* jzb (11)
* walters (9)
* bowlofeggs (7)
* sayan (5)
* jkurik (4)
* scollier (2)
* tflink (2)
* nzwulfin (1)
* trishnag (1)
___
cloud mailing list
cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org

[atomic-wg] Issue #188 `Remove-Kube: produce official containers with Kubernetes components`

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
I have the kube containers added to the layered build service, but I'm blocked 
until the build service allows for releasing containers -- my kube master 
components are based on a master image, and the node components are based on a 
node image, and those images need to be releasable in order for my other images 
to inherit from them. 

@maxamillion mentioned that he was trying to get the release bits finished by 
devconf, so maybe it's ready now?

Beyond the kube containers, we need containers for flannel and etcd from 
https://github.com/projectatomic/atomic-system-containers to make their way 
into the fedora build service. I can become the maintainer for these, but, 
@dustymabe you were talking to someone in irc about getting these into the 
projectatomic docker hub namespace, maybe that person would like to maintain 
these for fedora?

Beyond that, we talked about removing the gluster and ceph bits as well from 
the image, and if those are to be distributed in containers, we need those 
containers, too. We can go part-way, as well, just removing from the image the 
elements that work and that we have containers for. Really, just containerizing 
the kube bits alone would be an improvement.
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/188
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[atomic-wg] Issue #187 `Remove-Kube: Make fully containerized install work`

[Jason Brooks]

The issue: `Remove-Kube: Make fully containerized install work` of project: 
`atomic-wg` has been assigned to `jasonbrooks` by jasonbrooks.

https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/187
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[atomic-wg] Issue #188 `Remove-Kube: produce official containers with Kubernetes components`

[Jason Brooks]

The issue: `Remove-Kube: produce official containers with Kubernetes 
components` of project: `atomic-wg` has been assigned to `jasonbrooks` by 
jasonbrooks.

https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/188
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[atomic-wg] Issue #187 `Remove-Kube: Make fully containerized install work`

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
I'm working on this, currently debugging some flannel system container issues. 

My ansible scripts are here: 
https://github.com/jasonbrooks/contrib/tree/atomic-update. 

I'm testing w/ two node, one master clusters based on a custom ostree tree 
built from: 
https://pagure.io/fork/jasonbrooks/fedora-atomic/branch/self-hosted-kube
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/187
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Atomic Host: important updates in testing

[Jason Brooks]

On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 6:41 AM, Matthew Miller  wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 07, 2017 at 09:37:31AM -0500, Dusty Mabe wrote:
>> Here is a summary of what is in updates-testing vs what is in updates:
> [...]
>> To rebase to the updates-testing tree just run:
>> rpm-ostree rebase fedora-atomic/25/x86_64/testing/docker-host
>
> Hmmm — I wonder if we could adopt fedora-easy-karma to work with
> ostree.

I used this on my last set of atomic updates-testing tests. I rebased
to the testing tree, and used rpm-ostree install fedora-easy-karma. It
might be nice to have that automatically included in the
updates-testing tree, though.

>
> --
> Matthew Miller
> 
> Fedora Project Leader
> ___
> 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

[atomic-wg] Issue #200 `Planning for interim container releases: To rebuild or not rebuild?`

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
We should do what's needed to ensure that our images pick up the most recent 
rpms -- when you say rebuild all content, do you mean rebuild the rpms 
themselves, or rebuild all the images?
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/200
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[atomic-wg] Issue #187 `Remove-Kube: Make fully containerized install work`

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
RE the flannel issues I mentioned: 
https://github.com/projectatomic/atomic-system-containers/issues/28, fixed by 
https://github.com/projectatomic/atomic-system-containers/pull/29
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/187
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[atomic-wg] Issue #187 `Remove-Kube: Make fully containerized install work`

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
Regular docker containers for the kube components 
(https://github.com/jasonbrooks/k8s-images/tree/f25), and system containers for 
flannel and etcd (https://github.com/projectatomic/atomic-system-containers). 

I'm not sure what you mean by kubernetes design on top of atomic.
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/187
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[atomic-wg] Issue #196 `moving to docker 1.13 in Fedora 25`

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
Will docker already be at 1.14 by the time f26 ships? I say it's better to test 
thoroughly in updates-testing and then push to stable when it's ready than 
flatly ban major docker updates within a Fedora release.
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/196
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[atomic-wg] Issue #198 `move ostree ref to be "container-host"`

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
+1 to alignment w/ rhel/centos -- even if we some day have other refs, the 
"standard" atomic host is the container-hosting one.
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/198
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Login Credentials for Fedora 25 AWS image

[Jason Brooks]

On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 1:24 PM, Michael Reilly  wrote:
> I am new to AWS and Fedora cloud images.  I created an instance from the
> Fedora 25 AWS image (HVM)  Everything appears to have gone well.  However
> the AWS help indicates that to login I use ssh -i 
> root@

try fedora as the user name, and that user should be able to sudo

>
> However being new I am not sure the root account is enabled.  (I have root
> disabled on my PC).  More importantly I do not know the password.
>
> Is there a document describing how to ssh into my newly created instance?
>
> Thanks,
>
> michael
> --
> 
> Michael Reilly
> Sedona, AZ
>
> ___
> 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

[atomic-wg] Issue #231 `clarify meaning of "rolling" for future fedora atomic releases`

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
> @jasonbrooks. at least one other possible interpretation of "rolling" is that 
> we consume from rawhide and don't take Number release content. This would 
> prevent "large change" upgrades like when going from f24 to f25, but would be 
> problematic for other reasons.

How large are the changes, really? IMO the biggest and most disruptive 
component in Fedora Atomic is the kernel, and that rolls within major releases 
already, w/ no user choice or opt-in, short of not installing the update.

> I can accept your definition of rolling (although, I'm not sure if we should 
> call it rolling) with some tweaks:

I didn't introduce the term "rolling" in this discussion -- my question is not 
rolling or not rolling, my question is why, if we support a single stream of 
content, do we not deliver that single stream of content in a single stream. If 
we want to call that rolling, great, but we can call it anything.

> 
> rather than making the "atomic host upgrade" automatically go from 25->26, 
> make it a bit of a bigger deal. options:
> we make "autmatically upgrading across major version boundaries" configurable 
> and "opt in"
> we enhance the interface to let the user know about the pending EOL and the 
> move to the new major version

I don't like it. You choose whether or not to upgrade your system. There's the 
opt in/out. If you choose upgrades, why not deliver the bits we're supporting?

If there's some life-support-only option, why not make that the option that 
requires user action? So, by default, you're on fedora atomic, and if you 
choose, you can optionally rebase to the life-support ref.

If f2n to f2n+1 upgrades, whether delivered via regular atomic host upgrade or 
via rebase, don't go smoothly for people, then that'll be the fault of this WG. 
If we're only actively supporting one major release at a time, this is how it 
must be. So why not make it easier/clearer?

We have the perfect software distribution mechanism for this, complete with 
rollback if the user is not happy -- let's use it, and show off our strengths. 
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/231
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[atomic-wg] Issue #231 `clarify meaning of "rolling" for future fedora atomic releases`

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
> It feels weird to do semi-automatic rebases on the client side.  Not saying 
> it's wrong.  But we need to think a bit about how people manage automated 
> systems.
> I guess my question here is - who wouldn't want a single stream?  I can think 
> of an answer for today - with kube in tree, a Fedora major may mean a new 
> kube major.  (Though we haven't really defined this at all)

I've been thinking about adding a package like kubernetes-master-container, 
that would include just the systemd service files needed to pull and run the 
master components. We could do the same for kubernetes-node. This way, an 
upgrade that removed the binaries could continue working pretty seamlessly.
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/231
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[atomic-wg] Issue #231 `clarify meaning of "rolling" for future fedora atomic releases`

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
@dustymabe How about this: why should fedora do it differently than rhel? RHEL 
AH has had the same tree through all docker upgrades, through all kube 
upgrades, through half of kube being removed, across 7.1, 7.2, 7.3. They 
support one atomic, so they have one atomic. You want to support one atomic, so 
why do it differently?



``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/231
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[atomic-wg] Issue #228 `clarify policy on atomic host support for older Fedora "number" releases`

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
AFAICT, the thought is that rolling is a big disruptive thing, so we need to 
study it first. We are in fact not supporting N-1 now, so making that official 
isn't really a big deal.
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/228
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[atomic-wg] Issue #229 `decide on version scheme and image naming scheme for f26`

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
We should keep the major version number. It'll be useful for when we start 
"rolling."
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/229
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[atomic-wg] Issue #231 `clarify meaning of "rolling" for future fedora atomic releases`

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks reported a new issue against the project: `atomic-wg` that you are 
following:
``
The Atomic WG has unofficially paid attention to only a single fedora atomic 
release at a time, specifically, the release based on the current latest stable 
Fedora release. There's a proposal to formalize this in [issue 
228](https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/228). 

In the discussion around this issue, @jberkus asked why, if we are to support 
only a single fedora atomic release at a time, do we not adopt a "rolling" 
release structure for fedora atomic, where the tree served from the fedora 
atomic ostree repo is always composed from the current latest stable Fedora 
release.

In response, @dustymabe suggested that "rolling" could mean many different 
things, and that we should discuss these many meanings in a future VFAD.

In this issue, we can collect some thoughts on what "rolling" means in advance 
of this VFAD.

To me, a rolling fedora would match up with what rhel and centos atomic do. 
There's a single repo, and an upgrade from rhel atomic 7.1 to 7.2 to 7.3, etc. 
simply involves runnning `atomic host upgrade`. The same would apply to fedora 
for 25 to 26 to 27, etc. 

Currently, fedora users are expected to rebase each six months, in the same way 
that they might rebase between completely separate streams, such as from fedora 
atomic to centos atomic.

So, upgrades, today:

```
$ sudo ostree remote delete fedora-atomic
$ sudo ostree remote add fedora-atomic --set=gpg-verify=false $ 
https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/atomic/25
$ sudo rpm-ostree rebase fedora-atomic:fedora-atomic/25/x86_64/docker-host
$ sudo systemctl reboot
```

Upgrades, in a "rolling" world:

```
$ sudo atomic host upgrade
$ sudo systemctl reboot
```

This would have zero impact on the current two-week release scheme. Just as we 
tried to release fedora atomic 24 every two weeks up until fedora 25 release 
day, when we shifted to trying to release fedora atomic 25 every two weeks, and 
stopped paying attention to the 24 stream, we would, at some future point, be 
releasing fedora atomic every two weeks based on f2N rpms, switch over to the 
f2N+1 rpms on or near release day, and proceed from there. 

The only difference is convenience and clarity for our users.

Before Dusty cited the many meanings of "rolling" I hadn't even considered 
additional meanings, but maybe we can list some of those here in preparation 
for the VFAD.
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/231
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[atomic-wg] Issue #229 `decide on version scheme and image naming scheme for f26`

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
Would there ever be more than one version per day? I don't see a problem w/ 
something like `25.17.0, 25.17.1, 25.17.2, 25.17.3`
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/229
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Fedora Atomic WG Workflow Proposal

[Jason Brooks]

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 6:21 AM, Adam Miller
 wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 12:02 PM, Adam Miller
>  wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 4:50 PM, Adam Miller
>>  wrote:
>>> Hello all,
>>> Recently I attempted to start a mailing list thread that was the
>>> product of a discussion on IRC about putting together an Atomic WG
>>> workshop session[0] at DevConf[1].
>>>
>>> This was then discussed during today's Atomic WG Meeting[2] where it
>>> was decided that we should make this Workshop into a re-occurring
>>> Virtual Fedora Activity Day(FAD[3]) instead taking place every 2
>>> months.
>>>
>>> I would like to propose the following:
>>> Each Virtual FAD occurs on a Thursday, the day after a Fedora
>>> Atomic WG meeting such that we can use the meeting the day before to
>>> plan out the work to be done at the Virtual FAD. All work will be
>>> tracked in a kanban[4] board, I've created one for this purpose in
>>> Fedora's Taiga instance[5] (Note: I don't know why my FAS name is in
>>> the URL, Taiga just does that).
>>> In the kanban board, we would create cards in the NEW column
>>> through out the two month cycle between Virtual FADs (these should
>>> correlate to tickets in pagure[6]), then on the meeting before the FAD
>>> we would "groom" the NEW cards that we want to accomplish on the
>>> following day of the Virtual FAD, these "groomed" cards would be
>>> placed into the READY column to signify they are ready to be worked
>>> on. On the day of the VFAD, participants/contributors would then
>>> assign a card to themselves that they want to work on, and move the
>>> card into "IN PROGRESS" so that everyone knows what is being worked on
>>> and nobody attempts to work on the same thing (unless that's
>>> intentional, in that case both people's names should be listed in the
>>> card description for reference). Once a task is done, then it should
>>> be moved to the DONE column. This will give a good reflection of what
>>> work was accomplished during the VFAD and we can (optionally) have a
>>> retrospective meeting after the VFAD about what went well, what didn't
>>> go well, and what we could do better next time. Also the day before
>>> the next VFAD at the start of the "grooming" session (the weekly
>>> Atomic WG meeting), all the previous VFAD's cards in the DONE column
>>> from the previous VFAD should be moved to ARCHIVED for posterity.
>>>
>>> Cards created should be units of work that can feasibly be
>>> accomplished in a day or less worth of work.
>>
>> Based on previous feedback in the thread I have come with a modified
>> proposal (effectively the same, just a different tracking mechanism so
>> we're doing everything in one place).
>>
>> Modifications to proposal:
>> We will create a Pagure Roadmap Milestone[0] for each Virtual FAD,
>> items that we want to accomplish in that VFAD that we groom in the
>> meeting before the VFAD will be assigned to that milestone. From there
>> we will create the Pagure Labels: NEW and IN_PROGRESS (we can
>> un-capitalize or format differently if anyone has a preference).
>> Everyone will also create a Pagure Label with their FAS name that can
>> be applied to Issue Tickets that people are working on (this will also
>> be nice because a Ticket can have multiple labels so if multiple
>> people are working on a single Ticket, we can track that).
>> Tickets will be given the NEW Label when they are assigned to a
>> Milestone during grooming. On the day of the VFAD, at the point in
>> time someone wants to work on something: the NEW Label is removed, he
>> IN_PROGRESS Label is applied, and the FAS account name Label of the
>> person(s) working on the Ticket is added. Once a Ticket is complete:
>> the IN_PROGRESS label should be removed, and the Ticket Closed. This
>> will leave it  in the Milestone of the VFAD but mark it as Closed,
>> effectively both completing it and archiving it.
>>
>> I created a milestone demo and added everyone from the atomic-wg[1]
>> pagure repo there in case anyone wants to play around with the
>> proposed workflow[0].
>>
>> Also as a side, we should really have an atomic-wg FAS group. :)
>>
>> Thoughts?
>
> Thread bump. Anyone had a chance to read this? Any comments?

I looks good to me, I say we get rolling with it and iterate as
needed, but the basic plan here seems solid.

Jason

>
> -AdamM
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -AdamM
>>
>> [0] - https://pagure.io/milestones-demo/roadmap
>> [1] - https://pagure.io/atomic-wg
>>
>>>
>>> I would like to ultimately propose we move to a more iterative cycle
>>> where we use this workflow weekly instead of dedicating a single day
>>> every 2 months (these periods of time are often known as a "sprint" in
>>> Agile[7]) but my hope is that this is a good place to start and we can
>>> improve over time.
>>>
>>> If this is acceptable as a change we would like to adopt as a group, I
>>> am happy to 

Re: overlayfs for AFTER Fedora 25

[Jason Brooks]

On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 12:14 PM, Dusty Mabe  wrote:
>
> In the cloud meeting today I brought up overlayfs and F25. After
> discussing with the engineers closer to the technology they recommend
> waiting to move to overlayfs as the default in F26.
>
> I think this will work well because it will give us some time to allow
> people to "try" overlayfs in F25 (we should provide good docs on this)
> and then give us feedback before we go with it as default in F26. If
> the feedback is bad then maybe we wouldn't even go with it in F26, but
> hopefully that won't be the case.
>
> Thoughts?

Sounds good to me.

>
> Dusty
> ___
> 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: Fedora Cloud/Atomic Test Day

[Jason Brooks]

I was supposed to send out an ML msg about that but I haven't done it yet.
How does Oct 11 sound?

Jason

On Sep 28, 2016 10:47, "Dusty Mabe"  wrote:

> Hey Jason,
>
> Did you ever make any progress on planning a test day for us for this
> cycle?
>
> Dusty
>
___
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

[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

Re: Cloud Atomic Server WGs

[Jason Brooks]

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 12:56 PM, Chris Murphy  wrote:
> Couldn't make the Cloud meeting but just skimmed the log;
> cross-posting to server@ list.
>
> How about combine Cloud and Server WGs into a new WG with three new sub 
> groups:
> hardware, cloud, atomic?
>
> That way you get the benefit of one WG working on the big picture
> stuff that enables integration among the outputs. And you get
> collaboration that isn't possible by just cross posting emails on two
> lists. Curation of the outputs is enhanced so they're optimal when the
> products are used together, while not being exclusive to each other.
> The differences are minor tweaks in terms of payload, but e.g.
> cloud-init is not something most people in the Server WG probably know
> much about. So most of Cloud + Server overlaps with really vertical
> knowledge base needed to do the small tweaks that cause substantial
> product differentiation.
>
> On the issue of membership, anyone unavailable in the next 30 days
> should be dropped. There will be another time for their participation
> when they're available. I'd look into making it easy to rotate out WG
> members to avoid long periods of inactivity which inhibits others'
> ability to get stuff done, and avoid burn out when they've been on the
> WG too long.
>
> Maybe some WG seats should be ~18 months, and twice as many of those
> would be 1 release cycle. i.e. 1/3 of the seats are longer term, and
> 2/3 are short term. There's sufficient stability in FESCo to make
> frequent WG turnover a plus.

Not a bad idea. There's a ton of overlap, and it sounds like there are
a lot of atomic-type plans afoot in the server group, and atomic is
fundamentally about servers.

Jason

>
>
> --
> Chris Murphy
> ___
> 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: Discussion on changing the name of Working Group

[Jason Brooks]

> I am also willing to volunteer for this. As the base image is moving to
> server wg, and my work related to rel-eng testing side is stable, I can
> refocus myself to the Fedora Atomic host in the same way I was doing
> base image. Last few months were about jumping into too many things. I
> hope that I will be helpful in this case.

Awesome!


>
> Kushal
> --
> Fedora Cloud Engineer
> CPython Core Developer
> https://kushaldas.in
> https://dgplug.org
> ___
> 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: Discussion on changing the name of Working Group

[Jason Brooks]

On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 11:43 AM, Dusty Mabe  wrote:
>
>
> On 08/24/2016 11:27 AM, Kushal Das wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> During Flock PRD discussion, a proposal was put up about changing the
>> name of the WG to Atomic. We have few open questions from last week's 
>> meeting. I
>> will try to put those down here, if anyone wants to add to that list, or
>> explain things better, please go ahead and reply to the thread :)
>>
>> * If we rename how to make sure that the users know that we are not
>>   abandoning the cloud?
>>
>> * If we create a new group, then who else are still interested about
>>   helping out the Cloud WG?
>>
>> * We will require new user stories related to Atomic. This also brings
>>  in the question about old user stories in current PRD. They are still
>>  mostly valid. PRD updation is surely one major point towards Atomic WG.
>>
>> * Who will maintain Atomic workstation? If it is workstation wg, then
>>   how to reduce duplication of efforts?
>>
>> * What will happen to the Cloud Base image?
>>
>> * Who will maintain the Vagrant images?
>>
>> * What will happen to our effort to push Fedora to different public
>>   cloud services? We have AMI(s) right now, we also push to Digital
>>   Ocean.
>
> Others have made some good comments in this thread. I'm really not as
> concerned with these specific questions.
>
> I think the deeper problem is that there needs to be (I think) a person
> who is clearly identified to lead this effort (and ultimately this group).
> I think a lot of times it is hard for contributors to make meaningful
> contributions because the group is scattered and there is not really any
> one person to ask for a definitive answer on things. Sometimes a user will
> get a response back to a question/request/contribution, and sometimes not.
> I'm not saying we need one person to do all of the work, or to even be
> the expert in every area, but one person to at least know who is responsible
> for each part and to track down when things don't get done.
>
> As a group we haven't been very thorough and that has led to some
> serious issues with some of our shipped bits at times. To be honest I
> think we just need some dedicated leadership. Someone who crosses the
> Ts and dots the Is and greases the skids so that it is easy to on-board
> and make contributions. Hopefully this would lead to increased contribution
> activity and a more vibrant community.

This is sort of what I've been doing w/ CentOS Atomic, and I can do
the same w/ Fedora Atomic -- there's a lot of overlap.

Jason

>
> This is just my $.02.
>
> Dusty
> ___
> 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: Fedora Cloud/Atomic Test Day

[Jason Brooks]

That'd be fine, or would Fri be better?

On Sep 28, 2016 11:54, "Dusty Mabe" <du...@dustymabe.com> wrote:

>
>
> On 09/28/2016 02:13 PM, Jason Brooks wrote:
> > I was supposed to send out an ML msg about that but I haven't done it
> yet. How does Oct 11 sound?
> >
> > Jason
>
> That week sounds good but I would suggest that Monday or Fridays tend
> to be a little lighter on meetings than other days so we might get
> more people with some alone time to do some testing/investigate
> issues.
>
> Would Oct 10th work?
> ___
> 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: Fedora Cloud/Atomic Test Day

[Jason Brooks]

On Sep 30, 2016 10:12, "Josh Berkus"  wrote:
>
> All,
>
> Where are we with getting F25 Atomic to boot?  If it doesn't boot, I
> don't see any point in having a test day.
>
>

Yeah, I was hoping doing it the week after next would give us time to get a
testable image.

> --
> --
> Josh Berkus
> Project Atomic
> Red Hat OSAS
> ___
> 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: Fedora Cloud/Atomic Test Day

[Jason Brooks]

On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:38 PM,   wrote:
> Hey Jason
>
> Did you guys file a ticket for the test day?
> If not , here's is where you can [ 
> https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/report/11 ]
>

I'm going to file this ticket and write up a post about the test day,
but I'm wondering if we should make it for Friday the 14th, to give us
more time to get working images, since we don't currently have
bootable test images.

Does this day work for people?

Jason


> I can help you with rest of the test day proceedings. You will also need to 
> create a test day wiki page and test case page and finally link it to meta 
> page which will show up on the test day app. Let me know , if I can help.
>
> Thanks
> Sumantro
> Fedora QA , Intern
> ___
> 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

[atomic-wg] Issue #158 `Proposed website changes for Cloud Base → Atomic Host switch`

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
The dark text on purple around "atomic cli" is a little tough to read.
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/158
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[atomic-wg] Issue #176 `status of kubernetes on fedora atomic 25`

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
> 
> There's a kube 1.4.5 in koji for fc26 
> (http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=816481), and I've asked 
> Jan about making it available for fedora 25.
> 
> Can you keep us in the loop here on the progress of this one?

Will do
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/176
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[atomic-wg] Issue #176 `status of kubernetes on fedora atomic 25`

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks reported a new issue against the project: `atomic-wg` that you are 
following:
``
We removed kubernetes, etcd, flannel, gluster and ceph from the atomic host for 
Fedora 25: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-atomic/c/219c9bb26426811a5f32188c59682ad70c3283e5?branch=f25

The idea is that these pkgs can/should be run as docker containers or system 
containers. I wrote a post about running kube in containers on CentOS Atomic, 
but things work the same for Fedora Atomic: 
http://www.projectatomic.io/blog/2016/09/running-kubernetes-in-containers-on-atomic/

However, we don't currently have fedora containers for kubernetes. There's a 
year-old PR for this: 
https://github.com/fedora-cloud/Fedora-Dockerfiles/pull/112. I used this PR as 
the basis for kube containers for CentOS: 
https://github.com/CentOS/CentOS-Dockerfiles/tree/master/kubernetes. 

Another option is using package layering to install the removed rpms if 
desired: 
http://www.projectatomic.io/blog/2016/07/hacking-and-extending-atomic-host/. 
This works, mostly, but the kube-apiserver that comes with kubernetes-master is 
granted CAP_NET_BIND_SERVICE so it can use port 443, and package layering won't 
support this: https://github.com/projectatomic/rpm-ostree/issues/462.

Whether we install kubernetes via package layering or containers, another issue 
is that the kube we have for fedora 25 is very old, 1.2, and current is 1.4.5. 
There's a kube 1.4.5 in koji for fc26 
(http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=816481), and I've asked 
Jan about making it available for fedora 25. I built it for f25 and el7 in this 
copr: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/jasonbrooks/kubernetes/.

kubeadm (http://kubernetes.io/docs/getting-started-guides/kubeadm/) is a slick 
way to run an up-to-date kube cluster, and the kubernetes project offers rpms 
for kubeadm, but the kubernetes-cni package they provide doesn't work with 
atomic. I made a patched package in a copr for f25 and el7 
(https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/jasonbrooks/kube-release/) and wrote 
about it here: 
https://jebpages.com/2016/11/01/installing-kubernetes-on-centos-atomic-host-with-kubeadm/.
 The rpm grabs the binaries from the upstream project, if fedora were to 
provide this package, we'd probably want to build the binaries ourselves. 
kubeadm runs kubernetes and etcd in containers, and these containers aren't 
fedora-based, and they come from upstream. They appear to be based on busybox. 
Also, kubeadm is considered alpha at this point.

We should:

* try to move to a more recent kubernetes version
* get kubernetes containers in place for fedora
* get fedora versions of the flannel and etcd system containers in place
* document how to install kubernetes and how to use package layering on fedora
* look further into kubeadm 

``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/176
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Blogs for F25 release

[Jason Brooks]

I summed up the state of kube on f25 in this issue:
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/176

On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 11:45 PM, Josh Berkus  wrote:
> On 11/09/2016 09:43 AM, Dusty Mabe wrote:
>> I believe we need to communicate a few things for F25:
>>
>> 1 - overlayfs - what it is, how to enable it in the various f25 images we 
>> release
>> 2 - containerized k8s - no longer in atomic host so we have to show people 
>> how to use it
>>
>> I am already planning to write the first blog post. Any volunteers for the 
>> 2nd one.
>
> I was planning to write out "how to install KubeAdm on Atomic"; is that
> what you're looking for?
>
>
> --
> --
> Josh Berkus
> Project Atomic
> Red Hat OSAS
> ___
> 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: weird error with docker-storage-setup

[Jason Brooks]

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 11:44 AM, Dusty Mabe  wrote:
> I haven't had time to really investigate but figured I would pass this along:
>
>
> qcow:
> http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/compose/branched/Fedora-25-20161021.n.0/compose/CloudImages/x86_64/images/Fedora-Atomic-25-20161021.n.0.x86_64.qcow2
>
> test results from last night's test run:
> https://apps.fedoraproject.org/autocloud/jobs/971/output
>
>
> error:
>
> [fedora@cloudhost ~]$ sudo systemctl status -l docker-storage-setup.service
> ● docker-storage-setup.service - Docker Storage Setup
>Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/docker-storage-setup.service; 
> enabled; vendor preset: disabled)
>Active: inactive (dead)
>
> Oct 21 18:40:37 localhost.localdomain systemd[1]: 
> docker-storage-setup.service: Job docker-storage-setup.service/start deleted 
> to break ordering cycle starting with multi-user.target/start
> Warning: docker-storage-setup.service changed on disk. Run 'systemctl 
> daemon-reload' to reload units.
> [fedora@cloudhost ~]$ echo $?
> 3

It looks like https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1384150

There's a merged PR for this. Looks like we need a new systemd w/ this


> ___
> 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: Join Us for a Fedora 25 Test Day Next Week (October 24, 2016)

[Jason Brooks]

On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 4:44 AM, Kushal Das <m...@kushaldas.in> wrote:
> On 19/10/16, Jason Brooks wrote:
>> Want to help make Fedora Atomic Host even better? Join us next week
>> for the Fedora Cloud Test Day, where we’ll be banging on the Atomic
>> Host image for Fedora. As always, we’re looking for many hands to help
>> put the release through its paces.
>>
>> To participate, you’ll need a system with Vagrant, libvirt/KVM, or
>> access to OpenStack or another IaaS that can consume the qcow or raw
>> images for Atomic. Alternately, if you have an Amazon Web Services
>> account, there will be AMIs you can test; check the wiki page for
>> links on the test day.
>>
>> Grab the image from the wiki [0], and then check out the test results
>> page [1] to see the tests you should run and report the results.
>>
>> [0] https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Test_Day:2016_10_24_Cloud
>> [1] http://testdays.fedorainfracloud.org/events/11

Thanks -- I had to fix the result page, it wasn't pointing to the
right metadata page. The correct result page is
http://testdays.fedorainfracloud.org/events/13 -- I'll change it back
in the wiki.

>>
> I have updated the testdays event page along with the test details. Only
> missing information for now is the list of AMI(s) for Atomic, which
> sayan will fill up soon.
>
> Kushal
> --
> Fedora Cloud Engineer
> CPython Core Developer
> https://kushaldas.in
> https://dgplug.org
> ___
> 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: Join Us for a Fedora 25 Test Day Next Week (October 24, 2016)

[Jason Brooks]

On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 7:54 AM, Jason Brooks <jbro...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 4:44 AM, Kushal Das <m...@kushaldas.in> wrote:
>> On 19/10/16, Jason Brooks wrote:
>>> Want to help make Fedora Atomic Host even better? Join us next week
>>> for the Fedora Cloud Test Day, where we’ll be banging on the Atomic
>>> Host image for Fedora. As always, we’re looking for many hands to help
>>> put the release through its paces.
>>>
>>> To participate, you’ll need a system with Vagrant, libvirt/KVM, or
>>> access to OpenStack or another IaaS that can consume the qcow or raw
>>> images for Atomic. Alternately, if you have an Amazon Web Services
>>> account, there will be AMIs you can test; check the wiki page for
>>> links on the test day.
>>>
>>> Grab the image from the wiki [0], and then check out the test results
>>> page [1] to see the tests you should run and report the results.
>>>
>>> [0] https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Test_Day:2016_10_24_Cloud
>>> [1] http://testdays.fedorainfracloud.org/events/11
>
> Thanks -- I had to fix the result page, it wasn't pointing to the
> right metadata page. The correct result page is
> http://testdays.fedorainfracloud.org/events/13 -- I'll change it back
> in the wiki.

Apologies! The correct results page link is
http://testdays.fedorainfracloud.org/events/15

>
>>>
>> I have updated the testdays event page along with the test details. Only
>> missing information for now is the list of AMI(s) for Atomic, which
>> sayan will fill up soon.
>>
>> Kushal
>> --
>> Fedora Cloud Engineer
>> CPython Core Developer
>> https://kushaldas.in
>> https://dgplug.org
>> ___
>> 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

[atomic-wg] Issue #177 `Disable interactive "cp" in fedora base image`

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
Right, I wonder if we can/should toss in some `unalias` commands into: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-kickstarts/blob/f25/f/fedora-docker-base.ks. `rm` and 
`mv` are also aliased to be interactive. CentOS has the same aliases.
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/177
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[atomic-wg] Issue #177 `Disable interactive "cp" in fedora base image`

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
It looks like you can ignote the alias w/ `\cp`.
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/177
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[atomic-wg] Issue #174 `network not coming up in fah25 qcow2`

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
We talked about enabling the network service, but we instead patched cloud-init 
to make NM work.
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/174
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[atomic-wg] Issue #180 `Future of Fedora Dockerfiles`

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
dist-git won't allow for pull requests, will it? 
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/180
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[atomic-wg] Issue #176 `status of kubernetes on fedora atomic 25`

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
kube 1.4.5 for f25 in bodhi: 
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-fffea4b1c3

I've been working on getting it running in rpm-installed node pkgs / master 
pkgs in containers. Notes on that here: 
https://gist.github.com/jasonbrooks/bdbb0b142fc82bbd7b33759b3d934ba0
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/176
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[atomic-wg] Issue #176 `status of kubernetes on fedora atomic 25`

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``

> 1) it requires package layering, which really pushes up the idea of having a 
> way for users to build their own OStree servers.

What do you mean by that? Package layering doesn't require someone to build 
their own ostree server, it does require installing the layered pkgs separately 
on each host, though, and rebooting in between, although Colin had thoughts on 
cutting out the reboot step, which would make it nicer.

We could also offer multiple trees, some with fewer things rolled in by 
default, some with more.

And we could run these bits as system containers, like the etcd and flannel 
ones. I don't understand exactly what's involved in making those, in particular 
the bits about creating the config.json.template. It seems that this project 
could help w/ that part: https://github.com/jessfraz/riddler but I haven't been 
able to figure out how to build it to use it.
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/176
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[atomic-wg] Issue #180 `Future of Fedora Dockerfiles`

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
@pfrields That's it, thanks -- losing PRs is the main thing I'd miss about the 
current Fedora-Dockerfiles going away. It'll be awesome to have pagure fronting 
dist-git.
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/180
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: network not coming up on 20161011 FAH

[Jason Brooks]

On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 3:00 PM, Dusty Mabe  wrote:
>
>
> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/3677/16053677/Fedora-Cloud-Base-25-20161011.n.0.x86_64.qcow2
>
>
> seen on local kvm as well as on openstack newton:
>
> Cloud-init v. 0.7.7 running 'init' at Tue, 11 Oct 2016 21:45:39 +. Up 
> 7.01 s
> ci-info: +++Net device 
> info
> ci-info: 
> ++---+---+---+---+---+
> ci-info: | Device |   Up  |  Address  |Mask   | Scope | Hw-Address
> |
> ci-info: 
> ++---+---+---+---+---+
> ci-info: | ens2:  | False | . | . |   .   | 52:54:00:3e:f7:e3 
> |
> ci-info: |  lo:   |  True | 127.0.0.1 | 255.0.0.0 |   .   | . 
> |
> ci-info: |  lo:   |  True | . | . |   d   | . 
> |
> ci-info: 
> ++---+---+---+---+---+
>
>
> running dhclient on ens2 gives me an IP address.. race condition?

I'm seeing an selinux denial preventing resolv.conf from being updated:

Oct 11 22:05:46 atomic01.example.org audit[1304]: AVC avc:  denied  {
write } for  pid=1304 comm="dhclient-script" name="NetworkManager"
dev="tmpfs" ino=22077
scontext=unconfined_u:system_r:dhcpc_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023
tcontext=system_u:object_r:NetworkManager_var_run_t:s0 tclass=dir
permissive=0


Also, this "Warning: NetworkManager.service changed on disk. Run
'systemctl daemon-reload'" message when I check the status of
NetworkManager.


>
> Dusty
> ___
> 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: [atomic-devel] Fedora 26 change: using overlayfs as default

[Jason Brooks]

On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 2:24 PM, Dusty Mabe <du...@dustymabe.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 12/12/2016 05:19 PM, Jason Brooks wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 2:12 PM, Dusty Mabe <du...@dustymabe.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> After I get a bug[1] fixed and out the door I'm going to publish
>>> a blog post/docs on setting up Fedora 25 Atomic host and/or Cloud
>>> base to use overlay2 as the storage driver for docker.
>>>
>>> I'd like for everyone that can to test this out and to start running
>>> their container workloads with overlay2 with selinux enabled and let's
>>> file bugs and get it cleaned up for Fedora 26 release.
>>
>> This makes sense as the default for the docker package for non-atomic
>> fedora, since the alternative is loopback storage -- are you
>> suggesting this as a change for the atomic host as well? If so, what's
>> the rationale there?
>>
>
> I think the rationale is that we'd like to not have a much different
> experience whether you are using docker on atomic host or not. My
> thoughts are that overlay is where we want to be in the future and
> Fedora is the first place we should try that out.

It's a matter of choosing harmonization on non-atomic and atomic
fedora at the cost of harmonization between centos/rhel/fedora atomic
hosts, so there's gain and loss there, but if overlay is where we want
to be in the future (I assume "we" is Red Hat?) it makes sense to get
on with it.

>
> DM would still be supported via configuration of docker-storage-setup,
> just like overlay is supported today in the same way.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Dusty
>
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Fedora 26 change: using overlayfs as default

[Jason Brooks]

On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 2:12 PM, Dusty Mabe  wrote:
>
> After I get a bug[1] fixed and out the door I'm going to publish
> a blog post/docs on setting up Fedora 25 Atomic host and/or Cloud
> base to use overlay2 as the storage driver for docker.
>
> I'd like for everyone that can to test this out and to start running
> their container workloads with overlay2 with selinux enabled and let's
> file bugs and get it cleaned up for Fedora 26 release.

This makes sense as the default for the docker package for non-atomic
fedora, since the alternative is loopback storage -- are you
suggesting this as a change for the atomic host as well? If so, what's
the rationale there?

>
> Should we file this as a "change" for Fedora 26?
>
> Dusty
> ___
> 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

[atomic-wg] Issue #176 `status of kubernetes on fedora atomic 25`

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
Some updates:

* the issue of fedora having an aged kube is resolved, v1.4.5 is in f25 stable
* the issue of not being able to just `rpm-ostree install kubernetes` and 
proceed as if we never removed kube from the image is open. This won't work 
because [rpm-ostree can't deal](: 
https://github.com/projectatomic/rpm-ostree/issues/462) w/ the kube-apiserver 
binary in kubernetes-master
* the issue of running kube in containers on fedora atomic is in progress:
* I've been working w/ these [kube 
containers](https://github.com/jasonbrooks/k8s-images/tree/f25), and these 
[etcd](https://github.com/projectatomic/atomic-system-containers/tree/master/etcd)
 and 
[flannel](https://github.com/projectatomic/atomic-system-containers/tree/master/flannel)
 containers. They work (but need [this 
PR](https://github.com/projectatomic/atomic-system-containers/pulls)), and I'm 
adapting the [upstream ansible 
scripts](https://github.com/kubernetes/contrib/tree/master/ansible) to use them.
* I need to get those kube, etcd and flannel containers into the new fedora 
build system, and could use help with that.
* I need to get the ansible changes finished and upstreamed, and that ought 
to be straightforward, but I could use feedback on my PR once I get it together.
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/176
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Prerequisites to removing Kube from base image

[Jason Brooks]

On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 1:21 PM, Josh Berkus  wrote:
> Atomic WG:
>
> I've filed four issues which I think represent the prerequisites to
> making removal of the kubernetes binaries from the base Atomic image work.
>
> https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issues?status=Open=remove-kube
>
> Of course, those issues are pretty broad requirements.  Realistically, I
> don't see getting this done by F26 just because of the outstanding
> issues with a containerized install. But we'll see.

I'm working on these -- the kube containers are approved and I'm doing
the uploading / building now. I'll update the relevant tickets as I
go.

>
> --
> --
> Josh Berkus
> Project Atomic
> Red Hat OSAS
> ___
> 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

Cloud Meeting Minutes 2017-01-11

[Jason Brooks]

summary: 
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2017-01-11/fedora_atomic_wg.2017-01-11-17.00.html
full log: 
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2017-01-11/fedora_atomic_wg.2017-01-11-17.00.log.html

===
#fedora-meeting-1: fedora_atomic_wg
===


Meeting started by jbrooks at 17:00:12 UTC. The full logs are available
at
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2017-01-11/fedora_atomic_wg.2017-01-11-17.00.log.html
.



Meeting summary
---
* roll call  (jbrooks, 17:00:19)

* action items from last meeting  (jbrooks, 17:02:09)
  * ACTION: dustymabe walters jberkus to discuss overlayfs partitioning
issue  (jbrooks, 17:09:17)
  * ACTION: jbrooks to update compose your own doc  (jbrooks, 17:14:49)
  * ACTION: jbrooks dustymabe jberkus to collab on testing new
docker-storage-setup patches  (jbrooks, 17:15:12)
  * LINK: https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/180   (jbrooks, 17:16:02)
  * ACTION: all comment on PRD draft to discuss next week  (jbrooks,
17:22:48)
  * ACTION: dustymabe to start ticket to discuss virtual fads  (jbrooks,
17:35:59)

* November 21 ISO is not bootable on UEFI  (jbrooks, 17:36:55)
  * LINK: https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/185   (jbrooks, 17:37:03)
  * LINK: https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/192   (dustymabe, 17:38:19)

* Ship fedora-motd in F24 atomic image  (jbrooks, 17:42:31)
  * LINK: https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/160   (jbrooks, 17:42:36)

* Proposed website changes for Cloud Base → Atomic Host switch
  (jbrooks, 17:43:29)
  * LINK: https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/158   (jbrooks, 17:43:34)

* design, deploy and document Fedora OpenShift Playground (FOSP)
  (jbrooks, 17:45:36)
  * LINK: https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/153   (jbrooks, 17:46:26)

* open floor  (jbrooks, 17:47:30)
  * LINK:

https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/atomic/25/refs/heads/fedora-atomic/25/x86_64/testing/
(jbrooks, 17:58:11)

Meeting ended at 18:01:17 UTC.




Action Items

* dustymabe walters jberkus to discuss overlayfs partitioning issue
* jbrooks to update compose your own doc
* jbrooks dustymabe jberkus to collab on testing new
  docker-storage-setup patches
* all comment on PRD draft to discuss next week
* dustymabe to start ticket to discuss virtual fads




Action Items, by person
---
* dustymabe
  * dustymabe walters jberkus to discuss overlayfs partitioning issue
  * jbrooks dustymabe jberkus to collab on testing new
docker-storage-setup patches
  * dustymabe to start ticket to discuss virtual fads
* jberkus
  * dustymabe walters jberkus to discuss overlayfs partitioning issue
  * jbrooks dustymabe jberkus to collab on testing new
docker-storage-setup patches
* jbrooks
  * jbrooks to update compose your own doc
  * jbrooks dustymabe jberkus to collab on testing new
docker-storage-setup patches
* **UNASSIGNED**
  * all comment on PRD draft to discuss next week




People Present (lines said)
---
* jbrooks (103)
* dustymabe (58)
* maxamillion (42)
* jberkus (36)
* kushal (26)
* zodbot (18)
* sayan (13)
* misc (7)
* roshi (7)
* trishnag (4)
* scollier (3)
* bowlofeggs (2)
* dgilmore (2)
* puiterwijk (1)
* coremodule (1)




Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[atomic-wg] Issue #248 `Container Guidelines: Layered Images used as a base for other Layered Builds`

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
FYI, I have images like this now:

http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/docker/kubernetes-apiserver.git/tree/Dockerfile?h=f25

```
FROM registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/kubernetes-master:latest
```
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/248
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Meeting about rolling releases

[Jason Brooks]

On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 6:44 AM, Colin Walters  wrote:
> I can maybe attend this but I already have a lot of meetings today
> and I'd like to write some code.
>
> My feelings on this are basically:
>
> 1) I wrote on an issue I can't find now, but I was basically suggesting:
> ln -s fedora/26/x86_64/atomic-host fedora/stable/x86_64/atomic-host
>in the repo today, and anyone who wants this semantic today could
>rebase their machines once, and forever after just `atomic host upgrade`.

That comment is here:

https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/228#comment-430323

That'd be an improvement over what we have now. I'd rather see the
reverse: rebase to stay on the EOL version, rather than rebase to stay
on the supported version.

>
>(Parallel with this, adding the conceptual equivalent of the symlink in
> places like Vagrant Atlas (is that possible?) would be nice)
>
> 2) https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/231#comment-216478
> ___
> 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

[atomic-wg] Issue #233 `Container guidelines for systemd based containers`

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
I made some edits (I made them in a google doc and sent you the link if you 
want that):

=== systemd-Based Containers ===

A systemd-based container runs systemd(/usr/bin/init) by default as its 
entrypoint. One or more services are configured using unit files, the say way 
they would be on a physical system or a virtual machine.

systemd based containers have some advantages over running a service directly 
as the entrypoint (pid 1):

Support for multi service containers.
Support for unit file mechanism for starting the container.
Ability to reap zombie processes.
Population of /tmp with content needed to be run by a service
Proper handling of syslog messages
Proper handling of journalctl messages

 Issues with systemd based containers 

STDOUT/STDERR of the container does not come back though the container runtime 
logging system. systemd adds some requirements on the mechanism that containers 
are run:

systemd requires that a tmpfs be mounted at /run.
systemd requires that /sys/fs/cgroup be available inside of the container
systemd requires that the signal to stop the container is SIGRTMIN+3
systemd likes if /tmp is a tmpfs.

For more information on systemd in a container read this link.
https://developers.redhat.com/blog/2016/09/13/running-systemd-in-a-non-privileged-container/

 LABELS 

Run/Usage: Installing the oci-systemd-hook and oci-register-machine packages 
alongside the docker packaged shipped in Fedora takes care of most of the setup 
for running a systemd container. However, in order to provide compatibility 
with other container hosts, systemd-based containers should include a Run or 
Usage label that directs users to include the "--tmpfs /run", "--tmpfs /tmp", 
and "-v /sys/fs/cgroup:/sys/fs/cgroup" that systemd requires to run.

For example:

LABEL Usage="docker run -d -P --tmpfs /run --tmpfs /tmp -v 
/sys/fs/cgroup:/sys/fs/cgroup SYSTEMDIMAGE"


Note: On a container host without oci-systemd-hook and oci-register-machine, 
log files will not appear on the host, since there’ll be no way to make the 
logs available outside of the container.

 CMD/ENTRYPOINT 

systemd-based containers must include "/sbin/init" as an ENTRYPOINT or CMD, 
which will start systemd inside the container at run time. systemd will start 
up and manage services enabled with the Dockerfile using the standard 
"systemctl enable foo" commands in RUN statements.

For example:

FROM fedora:25
ENV container=oci
RUN dnf -y install httpd; dnf clean all; systemctl enable httpd
STOPSIGNAL SIGRTMIN+3
EXPOSE 80
CMD [ "/sbin/init" ]


Fedora now also provides a base-init container called fedora-init. This image 
is setup to running systemd containers by default. This means your Dockerfile 
could be as simple as


FROM fedora-init:25
RUN dnf -y install httpd; dnf clean all; systemctl enable httpd
EXPOSE 80


``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/233
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[atomic-wg] Issue #233 `Container guidelines for systemd based containers`

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
How does this look?

@dwalsh 

=== systemd-Based Containers ===

A systemd-based container includes the systemd system and service manager as 
part of its image in order to run one or more systemd-managed services within a 
single container, to take advantage of systemd's zombie-reaping capabilities, 
or to better handle container logging.

systemd-based containers' Dockerfiles have the following differences:

 LABELS 

Run/Usage: systemd-based containers should include a Run or Usage label that 
directs users to include "--tmpfs /run",  "--tmpfs /tmp", and "-v 
/sys/fs/cgroup:/sys/fs/cgroup", which systemd requires to run. Container hosts 
running the default Fedora docker package and the oci-systemd-hook don't 
require these run options, but they should be included for compatibility with 
other container hosts.

For example: 


LABEL Usage="docker run -d -P --tmpfs /run --tmpfs /tmp -v 
/sys/fs/cgroup:/sys/fs/cgroup -v owncloud-data:/var/lib/owncloud -v 
owncloud-config:/etc/owncloud owncloud"


 CMD/ENTRYPOINT 

systemd-based containers must include "/sbin/init" as an ENTRYPOINT or CMD, 
which will start systemd inside the container at run time. systemd will start 
up and manage services enabled with the Dockerfile using the standard 
"systemctl enable foo" commands in RUN statements.

For example:


FROM fedora:25
ENV container=oci

RUN dnf -y install httpd; dnf clean all; systemctl enable httpd

EXPOSE 80
CMD [ "/sbin/init" ]

``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/233
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[atomic-wg] Issue #253: lower case vs Initial Cap in Labels

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
> I'm ok with com.redhat.component for long and short term. However if we 
> decide we need a org.fedoraproject.component then can we just go with 
> com.redhat.component in the short term so that we don't block?

+1
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/253
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[atomic-wg] Issue #262: F26 Talking Points

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
These need some processing to suss out what's important, but f25 GA to current 
f26 is atomic 1.13.1 to 1.16.5: 
https://github.com/projectatomic/atomic/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/262
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Atomic WG Meeting Minutes 2017-04-05

[Jason Brooks]

#fedora-meeting-1: atomic_wg



Meeting started by jbrooks at 17:01:22 UTC. The full logs are available
at
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2017-04-05/atomic_wg.2017-04-05-17.01.log.html
.



Meeting summary
---
* roll call  (jbrooks, 17:01:42)

* previous meeting action items  (jbrooks, 17:03:17)
  * LINK: https://github.com/giuseppe/atomic-openshift-system-containers
(yzhang, 17:05:57)

* meeting tickets  (jbrooks, 17:07:57)
  * LINK: https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issues?status=Open=meeting
(jbrooks, 17:08:05)

* 264 2WK Atomic Release Criteria  (jbrooks, 17:08:37)

* 254 Label/comment for primary RPM?  (jbrooks, 17:09:38)
  * LINK: https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/254   (dustymabe, 17:10:01)
  * LINK: https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/254   (dustymabe, 17:10:40)

* 253 lower case vs Initial Cap in Labels  (jbrooks, 17:13:12)
  * LINK: https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/253   (jbrooks, 17:13:22)
  * ACTION: yzhang to update guidelines RE #253  (jbrooks, 17:18:47)
  * ACTION: jbrooks to notify container maintainers of guideline change
(jbrooks, 17:19:20)

* 248 Container Guidelines: Layered Images used as a base for other
  Layered Builds  (jbrooks, 17:22:37)
  * LINK: https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/248   (dustymabe, 17:23:04)
  * ACTION: jbrooks to add layered image section to guidelines RE 248
(jbrooks, 17:26:03)

* 264 2WK Atomic Release Criteria  (jbrooks, 17:26:32)
  * ACTION: miabbott to add example of explicit registry inclusion to
container guidelines  (jbrooks, 17:32:23)
  * LINK:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Roshi/QA/Atomic_Release_Criteria
(roshi, 17:34:31)
  * check out
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Roshi/QA/Atomic_Release_Criteria
and comment in issue #264  (jbrooks, 17:49:43)

* open floor  (jbrooks, 17:53:28)
  * LINK: https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/228   (jbrooks, 17:53:40)

Meeting ended at 18:01:39 UTC.




Action Items

* yzhang to update guidelines RE #253
* jbrooks to notify container maintainers of guideline change
* jbrooks to add layered image section to guidelines RE 248
* miabbott to add example of explicit registry inclusion to container
  guidelines




Action Items, by person
---
* jbrooks
  * jbrooks to notify container maintainers of guideline change
  * jbrooks to add layered image section to guidelines RE 248
* miabbott
  * miabbott to add example of explicit registry inclusion to container
guidelines
* yzhang
  * yzhang to update guidelines RE #253
* **UNASSIGNED**
  * (none)




People Present (lines said)
---
* dustymabe (98)
* jbrooks (91)
* roshi (64)
* yzhang (34)
* maxamillion (33)
* zodbot (25)
* trishnag (24)
* jberkus (20)
* miabbott (18)
* kushal (15)
* x3mboy (8)
* sayan (6)
* bowlofeggs (1)
* gholms (1)




Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4

.. _`MeetBot`: http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[atomic-wg] Issue #262: F26 Talking Points

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
With 
https://pagure.io/fedora-atomic/c/785b27dfeeeb6055af8b6581c247ca1412128dd6?branch=f25
 did we actually start shipping more locales with atomic? That happened during 
25 but after 25 first shipped.
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/262
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[atomic-wg] Issue #295: Start using new mailing list/IRC channel around f26 release time

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
The atomic-specific bits of each atomic host are very close. The questions 
relating to each, including things like enabling gpg sig verification or 
mirroring ostree content, generally apply to both centos and fedora atomic. You 
can run centos or fedora-based containers on both hosts, rpm ostree issues 
apply to both, etc.

I really like the idea of bringing our "atomic" communities closer together, of 
having a main place to hang out and field q's that's more focused.
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[atomic-wg] Issue #295: Start using new mailing list/IRC channel around f26 release time

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
+1
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[atomic-wg] Issue #304: Update to kubernetes 1.7.x

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
The kubernetes project maintains two releases at a time -- one way we might 
approach this is to keep the newer release in rawhide and the N-1 release in 
Fedora stable, and swap when a new upstream releases goes GA. As long as we 
produce rawhide containers for the newer release, people running f26 can opt 
for either one.
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/304
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[atomic-wg] Issue #304: Update to kubernetes 1.7.x

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
Or, we could track the latest in Fedora stable and the alpha releases in 
rawhide -- that seems a bit more true to rawhide, and still worthwhile, but I 
can imagine people wanting to run the N-1 version, and we don't have a way of 
maintaining two versions in fedora stable, I don't think. I guess, unless we 
did some renaming...
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/304
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[atomic-wg] Issue #228: clarify policy on atomic host support for older Fedora "number" releases

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
> Suggested revision:
> 
> Due in part to this faster pace, the Fedora Atomic workgroup has always 
> focused its testing and integration efforts most directly on the latest 
> stable release, encouraging users of the older release to rebase to the newer 
> tree, and dealing with support of the older release on a best-effort basis.
> 
> Should be
> 
> Due in part to this faster pace, the Fedora Atomic workgroup has always 
> focused its testing and integration efforts most directly on the latest 
> stable release, encouraging users of the older release to rebase to the newer 
> tree as soon as possible.  Releases older than the current tree are supported 
> only on a "best effort" basis, meaning that the ostree is updated, but there 
> is no organized testing of the older releases.

+1
> 
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/228
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[atomic-wg] Issue #279: talk/workshop proposals for Flock

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
Discussing Kubernetes and Openshift Origin Deployment Options

by @jasonbrooks and @yzhang 

When it comes to methods of deploying kubernetes and openshift origin clusters, 
the Fedora community faces an embarrassment of riches: ansible scripts, 
kubeadm, oc cluster up, minishift and minikube, among other options. In this 
work session, we'll try to lay out the main options for setting up these 
clusters, seek out discussion and feedback about which options are working best 
for our community members, and develop some plans around better improving, 
documenting, and promoting these options.
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/279
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[atomic-wg] Issue #228: clarify policy on atomic host support for older Fedora "number" releases

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
PR for this blog post at: https://github.com/projectatomic/atomic-site/pull/434
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/228
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[fedora-atomic] PR #86: add back in gluster/ceph

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks commented on the pull-request: `add back in gluster/ceph` that you 
are following:
``
LGTM
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/fedora-atomic/pull-request/86
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[fedora-atomic] PR #87: add back in gluster/ceph

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks commented on the pull-request: `add back in gluster/ceph` that you 
are following:
``
LGTM
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/fedora-atomic/pull-request/87
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org