Re: Fedora Cloud Meeting Minutes 2021-11-11
On Thu, Nov 11, 2021 at 10:09:53PM -0500, Chris Murphy wrote: > > Minutes: > > https://meetbot-raw.fedoraproject.org/teams/fedora_cloud_meeting/fedora_cloud_meeting.2021-11-11-15.00.html > > Minutes (text): > > https://meetbot-raw.fedoraproject.org/teams/fedora_cloud_meeting/fedora_cloud_meeting.2021-11-11-15.00.txt > > Log: > > https://meetbot-raw.fedoraproject.org/teams/fedora_cloud_meeting/fedora_cloud_meeting.2021-11-11-15.00.log.html > Sorry I missed the meeting, but yeah +1 to (re)making Cloud Edition > officially as an edition I'm in favor of this as well! Let me know how I can help! -- Matthew Miller Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Future of Fedora Cloud as an Edition?
Today I learned that some people are quite surprised (and not in a happy way) that Fedora Cloud base is no longer considered an Edition. Please see discussion here, both on the history and the potential futures: https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/fedora-cloud-edition-not-an-edition-and-the-future/34064 -- Matthew Miller Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Fedora 34 GCP image
On Thu, May 06, 2021 at 02:21:39PM -0400, Dusty Mabe wrote: > FYI - I published the Fedora 34 GCP image to the `fedora-cloud` project in > GCP. > See https://pagure.io/cloud-sig/issue/328 for more details. Nice! -- Matthew Miller Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Fedora 33 in GCP
On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 07:41:02PM -0500, Dusty Mabe wrote: > We have published an image into GCP for Fedora 33 (see [1]). > The details are: > image project: fedora-cloud > image name:fedora-cloud-base-gcp-33-1-2-x86-64 > We're hoping to get this information added to the website at some point. What's needed for that? -- Matthew Miller Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Can't use F33 EC2 image: SSH key doesn't work
On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 04:40:46AM -, Kevin White wrote: > OK, the problem isn't with the key, it is with Putty. Ah, good to know! -- Matthew Miller Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: EC2 access for testing?
On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 04:02:29PM -0600, Geoffrey Marr wrote: > I have been using Amazon's "Free Tier" cloud machines to test EC2 images > since 2016. Anyone with an Amazon account (which is free) can spin up a > "free tier" machine to run the tests on. With access so easy, is it > Fedora's job to provide users/testers with an account with which to test > these images? Amazon is generously sponsoring the Fedora AWS account exactly to help us better provide Fedora OS images in their cloud. So, I don't think whether it's our job or not is the right question. It's something we're able to make available. -- Matthew Miller Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
Cloud/Server merge
Okay, we've talked about this but not actually done anything because everyone is busy. Here's my proposal for F30: not actually do anything different, but, we are redesigning the website, and I think we should consolidate Cloud into the Fedora Server section as a download/launch option. What do you think? -- Matthew Miller Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: cloud images and EFI
On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 09:16:11PM +0100, Alessio Ciregia wrote: > > What's your use case here? > I was using Scaleway cloud service. > They offer Fedora images (the most recent is F28). [...] > As far as I can understand, they only support EFI and not legacy bios. That sounds pretty solid. :) -- Matthew Miller Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: cloud images and EFI
On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 01:39:51AM +0100, Alessio Ciregia wrote: > Does Fedora cloud images support EFI boot? > Or better, there are images built to boot on EFI platforms? What's your use case here? -- Matthew Miller Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: More frequent Fedora Cloud updates
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 10:33:35AM -0500, Joe Doss wrote: > Cool! I don't really care where the cloud-sig moves to as a user as > long as the cloud images continue to remain as trimmed down as they > are now but with more frequent official releases for users to > consume. I definitely want to be apart of that discussion if they > plan is to move Fedora Cloud under Fedora Server's umbrella. Awesome. Are you, by any chance, going to be at Flock this summer? -- Matthew Miller Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/PPPCDKJK42DNMM7AZNAISMVM2FT6ZAS7/
Re: More frequent Fedora Cloud updates
On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 04:21:49PM -0500, Joe Doss wrote: > My name is Joe Doss and I want to help the Fedora Cloud SIG bring > more frequent tested releases of Fedora Cloud it's user base. The > goal of this project is to provide more frequent updates of Fedora > Cloud to users on a set cadence or on a case per case basis for > major security events. Hi Joe! This is awesome. It's something we've wanted for a long time but had no one really championing it, which is exactly what it needs. > I reached out to Dusty Mabe and he agreed to mentor me on this > project along with help from Kellin and Mohan. Awesome! > We will create issues under pagure.io/cloud-sig and try to get this > project rolling by Fedora 30 at the latest. Any comments or > suggestions on this topic are very welcome. Yeah, there's one thing -- I really would like to see Fedora Cloud merged with Fedora Server for F29 (or at the latest, F30). That shouldn't block this plan in any way, though! -- Matthew Miller Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/EFONM3KMPME2VG7HYTWY5TMZZ6HDX6W6/
[cloud-sig] Issue #282: Make sure official Fedora AMIs are in new regions as they come online
mattdm reported a new issue against the project: `cloud-sig` that you are following: `` See https://pagure.io/Fedora-Council/tickets/issue/139 I'm looking into what we can do about the non-official and possibly malicious AMIs, but a first-line defense should be making sure we expand to these new regions right away when they come online. Since we're (still; *sigh*) not in the Marketplace, we need to make sure this happens by hand. `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/cloud-sig/issue/282 ___ 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
mattdm added a new comment to an issue you are following: `` So, thinking back to "These folks generally prefer not to use "antiquated" media like email and IRC at all", maybe the answer is _not a mailing list at all_? I've been thinking of spinning up Discourse instance in OpenShift (either the Fedora instance or OpenShift Online) to replace Ask, and maybe we could use a second one for this. `` 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
mattdm added a new comment to an issue you are following: `` I don't think we want to direct all Fedora-related Atomic development discussion to projectatomic.io -- I don't think that's very discoverable for people in the Fedora community and will lead to confusion about 1) Fedora Atomic Host as an Edition and 2) whether Fedora community people in general are welcome to participate or need to go through some special hoops. I think it will decrease participation from areas like Docs, Marketing, and Ambassadors, right when we need to build that up. `` 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 #297: Disable deltarpms in the Fedora base docker image
mattdm reported a new issue against the project: `atomic-wg` that you are following: `` Because we do the nodocs and not all langs thing, the base docker image is missing files that prevent deltarpms from working on `dnf update`. This slows things down and wastes time when doing docker build. We could either tell people to turn this off every time in Dockerfiles, or we could disable it by default in the base image. `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/297 ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[atomic-wg] Issue #281: Figure out comprehensive strategy for atomic host container storage
mattdm added a new comment to an issue you are following: `` For what it's worth, I was talking with a Red Hat filesystems engineer and he strongly recommended moving to XFS across all of Fedora. Pretty much the only downside is lack of filesystem shrinking, and I don't think that's a big issue with AH. Not that we have to do it because RH says so -- I mean that that's an opinion I have some faith in. `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/281 ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[atomic-wg] Issue #290: Make fedora-minimal base image generally available
mattdm added a new comment to an issue you are following: `` I still think we need a much, much more modular systemd package to address this, rather than a fake one. `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/290 ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[atomic-wg] Issue #290: Make fedora-minimal base image generally available
mattdm added a new comment to an issue you are following: `` That's less than I expected, really. :) (And some of it really random. From coreutils, we loose `pinky` but not `base32` (which isn't in EL7 and I'd never heard of... but that's another story.) I'd really love to see a bug associated with each one of those `rm`s in `%post`. It seems like we could solve most of it with better packaging over time, and then get to the point where we _could_ do the additive thing. `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/290 ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[atomic-wg] Issue #290: Make fedora-minimal base image generally available
mattdm added a new comment to an issue you are following: `` Is it possible to make the minimal image the base of the regular image? That seems ideal from a testing perspective (not to mention explosion of streams). I've had in the back of my mind for a while the idea of fedora-minimal and fedora (regular) like that, and then maybe a fedora-batteries image above that, which includes packages not in the fedora image but common to some threshold of our official layered images. `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/290 ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Fedora Release Tools Monthly Status
On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 11:22:55PM -0400, Kate Carcia wrote: > In place of a demo this month, I am sending out this status report which > includes some interesting highlights. Feel free to let me know if you have > questions and stay tuned for the wonderful F27 work we shall soon be > reporting on soon... :) Thanks Kate! -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[cloud-sig] Issue #138: Produce updated cloud base images monthly
mattdm added a new comment to an issue you are following: `` I like the idea of building only when something changes, although as Dusty pointed out to me, that's practically a moot point for monthly updated images, as there's _always_ going to be something that's changed in that time. For "where", is /pub/fedora/linux/updates/##/CloudImages in the main mirror out of the question? Failing that, /pub/alt/CloudImages? For "decide to ship", it looks like the consensus above is that automated testing is considered sufficient. Can someone define specifically what that is to be? `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/cloud-sig/issue/138 ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Proposal: Release blocking for F27
On Mon, May 01, 2017 at 04:36:16PM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > I am going to strongly object to the Beta criteria. its not realistic > to support some random nightly. it causes a manual workload on someone > and increases technical debt. Something we are working really hard to > pay off. Its either part of Beta or it does not exist. What manual workload does it cause, on who specifically, and do we have resources to cover that? What technical debt does it increase? In any case, the proposal is not "some random nightly". It is "a selected tree/image built using the normal (two-week) release process". -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[atomic-wg] Issue #270: Update getfedora.org with Digital Ocean
mattdm added a new comment to an issue you are following: `` Sounds good to me. `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/270 ___ 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
mattdm added a new comment to an issue you are following: `` Can we combine 3 & 5 into one point? `` 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
Re: Meeting about rolling releases
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 01:28:00PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > For anyone who's interested, we'll be having a meeting about Rolling > Releases (vs. versioned releases). This is just to get some face-time > for the discussion of how rolling releases would work, what they mean, > and when we'll be ready to deploy them (if ever). I can't make this. But, do you have someone from Modularity and/or Base Runtime in this? -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[atomic-wg] Issue #232 `ssh issue on libvirt based images`
mattdm added a new comment to an issue you are following: `` I'd like to look at the logs still. :) `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/232 ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[atomic-wg] Issue #170 `Finish new Fedora Atomic PRD`
mattdm added a new comment to an issue you are following: `` It *also* just came up in the latest Marketing meeting. https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2017-02-14/marketing.2017-02-14-13.58.log.html#l-173 `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/170 ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: 2wk atomic release candidate: 20170213
On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 06:11:50PM +0100, Thomas Mueller wrote: > Tested the Cloud-Base vagrant virtualbox image with the puppet selinux > modules acceptance tests (https://github.com/voxpupuli/puppet-selinux). > Looks good. Awesome -- thanks! -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Ownership of the Cloud Base Image
On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 02:40:00PM +0530, Trishna Guha wrote: > Just another thought jumped in my mind: > We have lots of wikis with *Cloud* namespace. What about that? > Do we want to create wikis with *Atomic* namespace as well? I'm not > sure if this can be the best solution. > If yes we need people to volunteer for that. I don't think we should put a huge amount of work into the wiki, at least for public consumption. (It's okay for SIG/WG workspace.) I *hope* that we will have our revitalized docs infrastructure online RSN. -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Fedora Rawhide-20170208.n.0 compose check report
On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 01:09:33PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Wed, 2017-02-08 at 20:34 +, Fedora compose checker wrote: > > Missing expected images: > > Cloud_base qcow2 x86_64 > > This seems to be running into some kind of size issue: > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17670764 > if you look at screenshot.ppm , it's complaining about "Not enough > space in file systems for the current software selection. An additional > 295 MiB is needed." Partitioning problems, or some kind of crazy deps explosion? Hmmm. When I do a dnf system-upgrade to rawhide of a vanilla f25 cloud image, there is some additional stuff -- including having both python2 and python3 -- but I don't think enough to cause that. -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ 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
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. -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ 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`
mattdm added a new comment to an issue you are following: `` The Fedora approach would be to create a [Copr](https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/). `` 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
Re: Periodic Cloud Image Updates
On Fri, Feb 03, 2017 at 10:41:38AM -0600, Joe Doss wrote: > I was talking on IRC with Dusty and he said this topic would be good > for the mailing list. What would it take to get an updated cloud > image beyond the first image that comes out when a new version of > Fedora ships? So, we are already _making_ these; you can see them at https://apps.fedoraproject.org/autocloud/compose — they're currently under a compose ID with "Atomic" in the name, but AIUI that's going to be split out. (I was worried that these might not include updates, but that's fixed.) Let's make a list of what needs to happen... here's what I can think of: 1. Decide if we are okay with the level of automated testing these are getting, or if we need human testing, or if we need more automated testing 2. If we need more automated tests, someone needs to sign up for that 3a. If we need human testing, someone needs to sign up to write the release criteria 3b. And, someone would need to commit to doing the validation every time. 4. Work with release engineering and infrastructure to adapt the Atomic Host gating/release process for Cloud Base 5. Work with release engineering to get updated images to mirrors and stuff 6. Someone needs to sign up to update the Vagrant Atlas index 7. Work with websites to update cloud.fedoraproject.org to also offer updated images. (I'm thinking the page should default to the latest, but there should be some way to "scroll back" all the way to the GA releases.) 8. Decide if we want to switch Cloud Base entirely to this automatic process and eschew release milestones I'm sure I'm missing something -- what else should be added? -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[atomic-wg] Issue #199 `Plan for Atomic prerelease images`
mattdm added a new comment to an issue you are following: `` _I_ think it makes sense to have that on a prerelease page, but I'll let others weigh in too. `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/199 ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[atomic-wg] Issue #199 `Plan for Atomic prerelease images`
mattdm added a new comment to an issue you are following: `` I think that we should start producing prelease images immediately at the branch (later this month — 2017-02-21) as part of the two-week process. I don't think there should be specific Alpha/Beta builds. `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/199 ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: fedora/25-cloud-base on atlas
On Fri, Feb 03, 2017 at 03:19:47PM +0100, Thomas Mueller wrote: > > Part of that might be self-reenforcing, as there haven't been enough > > downloads of Atomic yet to bump it to the front page when you search > > for "Fedora". > Google Search: Fedora Atomic I meant here: https://atlas.hashicorp.com/boxes/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93===fedora -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: fedora/25-cloud-base on atlas
On Fri, Feb 03, 2017 at 09:43:47AM +0100, Thomas Mueller wrote: > Also download numbers on atlas indicate more interest for cloud-base > than atomic for vagrant. Part of that might be self-reenforcing, as there haven't been enough downloads of Atomic yet to bump it to the front page when you search for "Fedora". Is there any way to get download numbers over time? That would be very interesting. -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: tunir tests: what's this useradd-not-found failure?
On Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 06:44:14PM +0530, Kushal Das wrote: > > I'm looking at https://apps.fedoraproject.org/autocloud/jobs/740, where > > there is a failure in the Fedora Cloud Base vagrant-libvirt image (yet > > vagrant-virtualbox and others are fine). > It was a non-gating test about auditd, which got automatically fixed. We > did not make any changes on the tests. Yeah, but... how could that go wrong in this way? -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
tunir tests: what's this useradd-not-found failure?
I'm looking at https://apps.fedoraproject.org/autocloud/jobs/740, where
there is a failure in the Fedora Cloud Base vagrant-libvirt image (yet
vagrant-virtualbox and others are fine).
The specific failure (with whitespace removed) from
https://apps.fedoraproject.org/autocloud/jobs/1984/output is:
command: ## sudo python3 -m unittest
tunirtests.nongatingtests.TunirNonGatingtestaudit -v
status: False
test_audit (tunirtests.nongatingtests.TunirNonGatingtestaudit)
Tests audit ... FAIL
==
FAIL: test_audit (tunirtests.nongatingtests.TunirNonGatingtestaudit)
Tests audit
--
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/home/vagrant/tunirtests/nongatingtests.py", line 265, in test_audit
self.assertIn('useradd', f)
AssertionError: 'useradd' not found in ''
--
Ran 1 test in 0.140s
FAILED (failures=1)
How is it that useradd is not found in this image but everything else
works and other images are fine?
--
Matthew Miller
<mat...@fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader
___
cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[atomic-wg] Issue #197 `Change size of Root, Docker partitions in F26 Atomic Host storage setup`
mattdm added a new comment to an issue you are following: `` I think we can simplify the rules to 1. RootFS: 25% of disk space, with a minimum of 3GB and a maximum of 16GB 2. Docker Partition: maximum of 50% of total disk space 3. Leave anything else unallocated No need to specify a rule for unallocated, really. We could warn if the total disk is under 5GB, leaving less than 2GB for docker. I'm pretty sure that results in the same results as your examples. Question: what about swap? `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/197 ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[atomic-wg] Issue #197 `Change size of Root, Docker partitions in F26 Atomic Host storage setup`
mattdm added a new comment to an issue you are following: `` This should be easy to do with anaconda-based installs, but how would this work with images? `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/197 ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: About the recent failures of Atomic images on Autocloud
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 10:05:41AM +0530, Kushal Das wrote: > > Finally managed to isolate the issue. If we boot the image with only one > > CPU, the error comes up. If we boot with 2 or more CPU(s), no issues at > > all. Now the question is if we should make local testing on Autocloud > > with 2 CPU(s) or get this issue fixed somehow? > I think we need to find out what the issue is and fix it. +1. I wonder if this is actually a widespread problem that we've just noticed in this way. -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[atomic-wg] Issue #193 `Please add Atomic Host and Fedora Cloud Base to AWS Asia Pacific (Seoul) Region and other new regions`
mattdm added a new comment to an issue you are following: `` Hi David. I _do_, but we've been blocked on legal for... years. Email me or hit me up on IRC and I can give you details, but the short of it is that Fedora can't sign anything promising support beyond the community support we offer — and we can't sign anything accepting liability or offering indemnification. (But, yeah, if we had an agreement that would let us move forward, I'd like to keep the community AMIs too.) `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/193 ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [atomic-devel] Please test new docker version with CVE
On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 07:11:16AM -0700, Mike Ruckman wrote: > > With the power of roshi we might be able to make this happen! > > Also, I think he likes beer. > It's on my list of things that need a test plan :) Nice! Now, what else can I wish for.... -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Please add AMI image to AWS Seoul region
On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 10:22:26AM -, ms@sentience.rocks wrote: > Dear Matthew Miller, > > I see you commented about AWS Seoul region about a year ago. But we still > don't have fedora cloud AMI listed in Seoul region.. > > If this issue was forgotten because no one ever used fedora (docker) cloud > image in Seoul region, well, here I am .. ^_^ ~ > > For now i am using copied AMI from us west, but it would be really nice if we > have natively? listed offical fedora image.. I've filed a ticket to track this request at https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/193 -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[atomic-wg] Issue #193 `Please add Atomic Host and Fedora Cloud Base to AWS Asia Pacific (Seoul) Region`
mattdm reported a new issue against the project: `atomic-wg` that you are following: `` This [opened in January](https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/now-open-aws-asia-pacific-seoul-region/) and we missed it. (If we were in the Amazon Marketplace, this would happen automatically. Oh well.) See request on mailing list [here](https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/LEI55GLY3XFVBH3DLWJLYLQU574FYCRN/) Also, once available, don't forget to ask the web team to update the launch pages. `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/193 ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Fedora Cloud Images Home page - oVirt
On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 08:45:28AM +0100, Sandro Bonazzola wrote: > I'm looking at https://alt.fedoraproject.org/cloud/ and I'd like to ask to > mention oVirt[1] project as well > since oVirt can use Fedora 25 Cloud Base Images as well. > If this mailing list is not the right place to ask, can you please point me > to the correct place? I would suggest either adding to this ticket https://pagure.io/fedora-websites/issue/57 or filing a new one in that tracker. -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [atomic-devel] Please test new docker version with CVE
On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:11:42PM -0500, Dusty Mabe wrote: > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-dbc2b618eb Also, I will buy a beer or package of cookies or whatever other necessary bribe for anyone who creates a test plan for the Docker package. See: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/WX4EVTG3S2EXWMQ3DJBCBP6FNMJHZFRA/ -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Proposal: require DESCRIPTION, USAGE label for images
On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 08:12:53AM -0500, Subhendu Ghosh wrote: > I disagree that the usage should be limited to "used by another container". To be clear, I'm only suggesting that when it is meant to be used in that way, and as more helpful than N/A. This line is meant to be a brief statement > Even though that is the intended use, the usage description should be > uniform and state what capability or function is provided. > Actual usage pattern for code is always more interesting than intended use. ... and doesn't the "description" cover that detail? -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Proposal: require DESCRIPTION, USAGE label for images
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 12:40:27PM -0600, Adam Miller wrote: > +1 - I like this, it follows nicely with the upstream guidelines[0] > referenced in Fedora's that I'd like to further adopt as all of this > evolves in Fedora space. I see that these guidelines use all lower case; we should probably follow a consistent convention. Also, looks like instead of "usage", that recommends: help Command to run the help command of the image runCommand to run the image -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Proposal: require DESCRIPTION, USAGE label for images
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 10:44:03AM -0800, Josh Berkus wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 10:33:05AM -0800, Josh Berkus wrote: > >>> USAGE: single command line giving usage example > >>> for invoking the container; will be "N/A" for > >>> some containers. > > > > Why N/A? What circumstances would this be? > CNI Networking container for Kubernetes, for example. A bunch of > "infra" containers only get invoked by other containers and/or the > orchestration system. Could we develop standard wording for that? Like USAGE: Invoked by $OTHERCONTAINER or USAGE: Invoked by Kubernetes when $WHATEVERTRIGGERS or are there too many possibilities? -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: About the recent failures of Atomic images on Autocloud
On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 10:16:51AM -0500, Dusty Mabe wrote: > > I finally managed to reproduce the error on a local box. After doing the > > reboot like in [1], the tool can not ssh back into the vm. When I tried > > the same on debug mode on, it still fails for some time, and then > > randomly allows to ssh again. > > I could not reproduce this using the same images over our OpenStack > > cloud. Any tips will be helpful to find the cause. > > > Can we get together and debug this? Is this a key-generation entropy problem? -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Fedora 25 - need karma on new docker
On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 03:29:58PM +0100, Antonio Murdaca wrote: > I would also be super awesome if we had an automated way to validate Docker > packages automatically before being pushed to stable (thinking of > k8s+Docker in fedora-atomic for instance). As said elsewhere, we should > discuss this further on its own. So, good news — we're very, very close to having it so you can drop taskotron checks into dist-git and have them run automatically when the package is built. -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Fedora 25 - need karma on new docker
On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 08:37:40AM -0500, Dusty Mabe wrote: > We need this to fix docker pull from gcr.io bug which causes us to not be > able to run kubernetes: > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/docker-1.12.5-4.git03508cc.fc25 > This bug that this fixes is here: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1409873 It would be super-awesome to have a test plan for Docker. This is basically a wiki page describing steps users should take to validate an update. Put in the right wiki magic, and it shows up automatically in bodhi. For an example, take a look at https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-eb3447f0f7 and at the bottom in the "Feedback Guidelines", see "Test Case calc interactive" and "Test Case calc regress". Howto docs: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_package_test_plan_creation -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Fedora server cloud images dead?
On Wed, Jan 04, 2017 at 06:51:34PM +0100, Thomas Mueller wrote: > Hi > > If I google "fedora cloud images" first hit > ishttps://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Cloud_images. > > This page states go to http://cloud.fedoraproject.org/ which is then > redirected to https://getfedora.org/atomic/ . On this page i can't find > information about other images than Atomic. > > Are Fedora Server cloud images dead and only Atomic will exist? No; they're still produced but we had some miscoordination over the website. There will be a new http://cloud.fedoraproject.org/ coming soon — see the prototype version at https://alt.stg.fedoraproject.org/cloud/. In the meantime, see this message for download links and AMI ids. https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/AIDXE4BEBQKABSSSUQ5CF66ZAHM6CV6U/ Longer term, we expect the Cloud Base Image to merge with Fedora Server. -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[atomic-wg] Issue #170 `Finish new Fedora Cloud PRD`
mattdm added a new comment to an issue you are following: `` @jberkus Whatever was wrong before seems fixed now. `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/170 ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[atomic-wg] Issue #170 `Finish new Fedora Cloud PRD`
mattdm added a new comment to an issue you are following: `` @jberkus I suspect it's related to the FAS change to use kerberos. Maybe someone from the infra team can help. `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/170 ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [atomic-wg] Issue #170 `Finish new Fedora Cloud PRD`
I'm seeing that problem too. It was working previously, so I'm not sure what happened. -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
review my container?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404434 Following the process at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Container:Review_Process and the nascent guidelines to the best of what I know. As containers go, this isn't... super important. But I thought I'd pick a small thing which I'm already the package maintainer of as a way of dipping into the process. And, hey, it's an easy example of a containerized command-line tool. -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: next steps for migrating Cloud Base image to Fedora Server?
On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 05:01:56PM -0500, Dusty Mabe wrote: > I have been identified as a stakeholder of this image and have an > action item to deliver some paragraph that indicates such to sgallagh. So I'll check this one off as Dusty's problem now? :) -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
next steps for migrating Cloud Base image to Fedora Server?
I think we had general agreement around what we want to do here: have the Cloud Base Image become instead Fedora Server, but shipped as a cloud image and made available in cloud providers. What are the next steps to actually get there? -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[atomic-wg] Issue #160 `Ship fedora-motd in F24 atomic image`
mattdm added a new comment to an issue you are following: `` > We can enable motdgen.service at system boot. This will execute atomic and > dnf commands only during first boot and cache the results. I'm concerned that this'll make the first boot annoying slow. Can we just run it from a systemd timer? `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/160 ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[atomic-wg] Issue #5 `tracker for GCE work`
mattdm added a new comment to an issue you are following: `` CentOS isn't officially there directly - it's provided by SoftLayer. I'm not sure of all of the details behind that. `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/5 ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[atomic-wg] Issue #5 `tracker for GCE work`
mattdm added a new comment to an issue you are following: `` We are probably still blocked on legal issues for getting a listing, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't _work_. We could also better document the process by which users can get the image uploaded themselves. `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/5 ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Article idea: Launch fedora on dply.co
I came across this on Reddit yesterday — a Digital Ocean employee has a service where you can launch test images in a cloud environment really easily from a website with a github account. You get two hours for free. Since Digital Ocean has Fedora (Dusty tells me Fedora 25 should be available RSN), Fedora is an option. I was thinking about a Fedora Magazine article once F25 is available, with a direct link to actually launch a Fedora instance, and some screenshots showing how it works. I'm talking with the creator about also adding Fedora Atomic, and it occured to me that we could have some followup articles with things like "set up Wordpress in a container on Fedora Atomic" with pre-cooked configs for doing that with a button press. To try it (Fedora 24), click this: https://dply.co/b/fz95S8RH -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[atomic-wg] Issue #154 `make Fedora Atomic download page clearer`
mattdm added a new comment to an issue you are following: `` I have two small ones. First, I think the freshness indicator is not visible enough in the top bar. Maybe that's just me. I guess, for one thing, it's easy to gloss over header-section text, but also, there's no indication that that's a dynamic value. What about changing "Produced N days ago" to "Produced N days ago, on -MM-DD" (or whatever internationalized date format the web team prefers)? Second, it currently says "1 days ago". I'd love that to be properly special-cased to "1 day ago", or even better, "yesterday". And "0 days ago" could be "today" or "fresh for you just today!" `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/154 ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[atomic-wg] Issue #154 `make Fedora Atomic download page clearer`
mattdm added a new comment to an issue you are following: `` Should we update Josh's wiki page above or put proposals here? `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/154 ___ 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`
mattdm added a new comment to an issue you are following: `` > Where fedora/apache has > 1 million pulls, Once we've transitioned to the new system, let's make sure we don't lose this — we need a plan to get the images from the new build system to the docker hub somehow. `` 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: FYI: F25 image builds - none for the past few days
On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 10:31:42AM -0400, Dusty Mabe wrote: > We now have successful image builds! Please try them out! Awesome! -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Docker Layered Image Naming and Tagging
On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 08:55:33AM -0500, Adam Miller wrote: > The main thing that concern I have is that with modularity there is > going to be a concept of "base runtime" which will have a "generation" > associated with it (most likely, the "generation" will share a name > with the Fedora release number it was built from). Containers will be > built on top of the base runtime and depending on the modules > requirements, a module may select different generations of the base > runtime and since there's plans to distribute modules (at least > optionally) as containers, we'll likely need a way to distinguish > between "generations" of the base runtime upon which a container was > built. *nod* I guess that makes the question mostly whether the generation is something users need to fundamentally care about, or an insider detail. > Of course, that might not be something we need to worry about in the > event that the modularity metadata handles all the book keeping and > just maps the appropriate information to a specific docker image tag. > If that ends up being the case, I'd almost just say drop the first > httpd and make it registry.fedoraproject.org/httpd:latest I'd hate to make it top-level simply because modularity forgot to handle this because we forgot to tell them... > Thoughts? Should we bring this to the modularity group for review? Yes. Oh, for @-mentions in email. I'll find someone and bug them. -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Docker Layered Image Naming and Tagging
On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 04:43:55PM -0500, Adam Miller wrote: > > I'm not sure we should put base distro and distro version as the > > primary distinguisher. As a user, it's the application (and possibly > > major version of that application) that I care about. How about just: > >registry.fedoraproject.org/httpd/24/http:latest > >registry.fedoraproject.org/httpd/24/http:2.4.23 > > with Fedora version indicated by labels? Or even just registry.fedoraproject.org/httpd/http:latest and *really* have the Fedora version as an implementation detail (just the label, nothing in the path at all). Does that present any practical problems that I'm not seeing? -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: should we release new fedora cloud image for f24
On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 03:50:20PM -0400, Dusty Mabe wrote: > It looks like the image builds we are doing (at least for Fedora 24) > for the cloud base image aren't pulling in new packages. Oh! I assumed that they were. There's a small value in doing it without updates (it tests the build infrastruture, mostly), but it'd be a lot more valuable if they pulled in updates. (It'd actually be good to have one with updates-testing, too, as an early-warning system.) -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: should we release new fedora cloud image for f24
On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 03:22:10PM -0400, Dusty Mabe wrote: > As part of the next release of Fedora 24 atomic host should we also > release the Fedora 24 base image so that the released version doesn't > have the latest huge kernel bug in it by default? Generally we do this when the security team tells us to, and they didn't as far as I know reach out to say so in this case. (I think usually that's been for issues classified as "critical".) We *did* have aspirations of releasing respun cloud images monthly in any case, though -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Docker Layered Image Naming and Tagging
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 10:06:41AM -0500, Adam Miller wrote: > For layered images, we would follow something similar to: > > registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora/24/httpd:latest > registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora/24/httpd:2.4 > registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora/24/httpd:2.4.23 I'm not sure we should put base distro and distro version as the primary distinguisher. As a user, it's the application (and possibly major version of that application) that I care about. How about just: registry.fedoraproject.org/httpd/24/http:latest registry.fedoraproject.org/httpd/24/http:2.4.23 with Fedora version indicated by labels? -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
F25 atomic -- vagrant working, but not the qcow2?
What's the status of all of this? https://apps.fedoraproject.org/autocloud/jobs/326 Rawhide still completely failing, https://apps.fedoraproject.org/autocloud/jobs/324 and no F24 composes at all? -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: No Two Week Atomic Release
On Thu, Oct 06, 2016 at 10:25:31AM -0700, Jason Brooks wrote: > > Is there a reason we can't pull in the selinux policy version > > that I fixed? > Is it in bodhi yet? I'd think it'd have to make it all the way through > to show up in a release. It's going to take a lot of karma, too. I think we should have the ability to selectively pull things like this into Atomic from updates-testing. This seems like a poster-child case for when that might be a good idea. (But I don't see anything there, either.) -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Cloud and Server Q
On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 10:57:49AM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > So, I'm looking at this from a user perspective. > > * F25 is announced > * User goes to getfedora.org, sees new "atomic" icon. > * User clicks through > * User sees that Atomic is still F24. > > From that point, one of two things happens: > > 1. User files a bug, and we're flooded with "atomic download page not > updated" bugs, or > > 2. user decides that Atomic isn't a real thing and never goes back. I don't think we'd leave the Atomic page with F24 with no explanation. There's _already_ an explanation around the two-week cycle, and that can just be expanded a bit — again, in the case where it doesn't happen to be ready, which isn't necessarily where we're at. > I really don't see a flow that results in the user checking back two > weeks later to see if Atomic has been updated yet. Especially since > we're dealing with a substantial issue with SELinux and it's not > guaranteed that there will be an F25 atomic release 2 weeks later, either. They shouldn't have to check back; it should be part of the normal flow of updates. I can't see any situation where "come back in six months!" is a _better_ alternative. > You are the Project Leader, and you can certainly say "do it anyway". > But please understand why I think it's not a great idea. Well, here's some background thinking: new Fedora versions do not appear to be, in general, big drivers of user adoption. There's a spike of downloads the first week of a release, but it's a fraction of the total downloads for a release. And, each release keeps growing in use over its lifecycle until the next comes out. Basically, people are coming for Fedora, and getting whatever version happens to be current. This is one of the reasons behind dropping unique release names, and shortly after, focusing on the Editions — rather than making a big deal about Schrödinger's Cat vs. Heisenbug, the marketing push should be around Atomic, Workstation, and Server individually. The release does give us an excuse for PR, but it's my sense that two releases a year is a little overwhelming for that — we are still getting F24 reviews coming in. And, since column inches are (figuratively these days!) limited, generally the press we get is 90% desktop, with only mentions of Atomic and Server, so that benefit is dubious for Atomic anyway. -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Cloud and Server Q
On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 12:58:05PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > What this is sounding like is a huge discrepancy between what the > Council, PRD group, etc. think we should be doing and what we can > actually do. > > Given that, I think I should tell the designer to push the design > changes back. I don't see how that follows. In the ideal — and I think most likely, since the bugs making F25 not work are being knocked off — case, we'll have Atomic built on F25 at F25 GA date. In the less ideal case, we'll keep shipping the F24-based one, but there's no reason that can't work with the new Atomic-focused design. For that matter, we could launch that _before_ the GA. -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Cloud and Server Q
On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 11:13:02AM -0400, Colin Walters wrote: > It's not that simple - this is a messy topic. What I think this > is about isn't delaying or blocking - it's *prioritization*. If > an issue comes up in Anaconda or systemd or whatever > that affects the "next AH", we need those teams to priortize > those fixes the same as they do for Workstation or Server. > > As far as I know the "blocker flag" is the main means > of cutting through all of the red tape. Yeah, I've been talking about this problem for a while — basically, since Release Blocker is the only big attention-forcing hammer we have, we tend to hit too many things with it. We need a different way. > Now, we could discuss alternatives, such as having > Atomic Host being able to carry its own overrides > temporarily. As you know, I'm in favor of this possibility should it come to that. -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Cloud and Server Q
On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 09:46:44AM -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote: > We need to be clear on the difference between considering it important > for Atomic images to be ready on release day, and being "release > blockers." The latter has a very specific meaning as Adam W can > attest. Being a deliverable is not the same as being release > blocking. This seems like a problem of vocabulary. Agreed that it's a terminology problem. Things like "catastrophic infrastructure failure and the getfedora.org website totally doesn't work" would block the release, but not, as far as I know, be a "release blocker". (Or some similar example.) This is in some ways similar to that. > I think mattdm would agree we don't want to potentially, > *indefinitely* block a six-month release with a deliverable that can > be fixed and re-released in two weeks. That's what "release blocking" > means. If it's not ready, the release doesn't go out. This was an > overwhelming point in having that two week cycle -- to give more > flexiblity vs. the standard Fedora release. > > Does this mean we shouldn't strive to have Atomic images ready > day-and-date on GA? No. We missed this narrowly in F24, as I recall, > and we should avoid repeating that, if at all possible. But let's not > undermine a major dimension of the two-week release by confusing the > release-blocker definition. As we get into the Grand World of Modularity, there's going to be more and more stuff like this. If the base runtime is updating on a one month cycle, and GNOME updating whenever the upstream x.y.1 is ready, and server roles all coming out as each is updated... a "release" is more a line in the sand than anything else. -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Fedora 25 atomic images?
On Mon, Oct 03, 2016 at 04:05:24PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > As Dennis said, there are Atomic images produced nightly as part of the > *regular* Branched composes. So you don't see any Fedora-Atomic-25- > (foo) fedmsgs because there are no Fedora-Atomic-25 composes. There are > just Fedora-25 composes that include Atomic images. > > There won't be any need for Fedora-Atomic-25 composes until Fedora 25 > goes stable. > > 'Fedora-Atomic' composes are basically post-release stable nightly > composes, only at present we only do them in order to get the Atomic > images, so we call them 'Fedora-Atomic' composes. A! Got it through my head now. Thanks. :) One can see this unified compose at, for example, https://apps.fedoraproject.org/autocloud/jobs/302 (and see that the Atomic parts are failing). What causes the transition from this to Fedora-Atomic-25? Manual changes? Is there a documented SOP for this? -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Fedora Cloud/Atomic Test Day
On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 10:39:39AM -0700, Jason Brooks wrote: > > 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. It probably will, but I think it answers the question about whether making it a release-blocker for everything else is even possible. For F26, would it be possible to start building it at branch from rawhide? -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora 25 atomic images?
I see Fedora Rawhide, just Fedora (cloud base, I assume) 25, and Fedora Atomic 24 in https://apps.fedoraproject.org/autocloud/compose?limit=20. Shouldn't there also be an Atomic 25 branch by now? (Shouldn't there be one starting with branching, for that matter?) Or am I just missing it? -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Docker Layered Image Naming and Tagging
On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 05:03:57PM -0500, Adam Miller wrote: > 1) Do we want to maintain docker images for every Fedora Release or do > we want to focus only on latest? (i.e. - do we want to maintain them > like we do rpms or take a different position) Since (for now at least) these images will be composed out of existing RPMs, is there any reason to _not_ keep both branches? We basically get that "for free" in terms of human effort (although not build time and resources). -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Docker Layered Image Naming and Tagging
On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 04:45:08PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > Take everyone's favorite destruction test case, PostgreSQL. For > Postgres, replication doesn't necessarily work between major versions, > so once we put out a major version we need to keep it out. > > If we have a PostgreSQL-9.5.3 image on Fedora 24 Base out there, then: > > A. it's OK to replace it with a PostgreSQL-9.5.4 image on Fedora 24 > B. it's OK to replace it with a PostgreSQL-9.5.4 image on Fedora 25 > C. it's NOT OK to drop it any only have a PostgreSQL-9.6.1 image available > > I have mixed feelings about whether or not we should do (B) as policy. > In cases like this, I usually come down to: what's easier? Freezing the > base image for the major version of the application, or advancing it? Hmmm - this seems like exactly the problem Modularity is aiming at. > One thing we can do to ameliorate that is make sure we name images after > the major version of the app and not after the patch release, i.e. the > PostgreSQL container will be >registry.fedoraproject.org/postgresql:9.5 In the modularity terminology discussion from earlier, this'd be the "stream". Or whatever equivalent term to that is chosen. -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Cloud and Server Q
On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 04:16:15PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > think QA clearly understands what cloud image(s) are release blocking, > > as previously they were just the non-atomic images. > Which images are prominent on the download pages and how much of a > relationship there is between that and 'release blocking' status is > *also* not my problem, but I'd agree with you (Chris) that it'd be > rather strange for the most prominently advertised deliverable for a > given product not to be a release-blocking one. I don't think that Atomic *needs* to be release blocking, because if it misses the grand unified release, we have the ability to update it at the next cycle, so it's less of a big deal. But if we collectively prefer to make sure everything is lined up on the release day... I can see arguments for that, too. -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Fwd: Re: getfedora.org/atomic notes
On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 10:01:17AM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > OK here is what I'm thinking approaches finalish: > front page - > https://raw.githubusercontent.com/fedoradesign/nextweb-assets/master/Mockups/Brochure%20Site/brochure-mock-atomic_WIP.png Whoo -- looks great. > I put the ISO in the right hand side 'Other Downloads' - that's actually > where it is today. I kept the top without a download link - the EC2 > stuff has two buttons and requires some explanation so I don't think it > makes sense to have the buttons up at the very top. Is there any possibility of adding some short description to the Other Downloads? Either a line of text, or a hover-over, or a (?) icon with hover/click for more. Atomic Host * ISO: "Install Atomic Host to bare hardware" * Qcow2 Image: "For direct use in OpenStack" * xz-raw Image: "Unpack and use in other cloud systems" Docker Image "`docker pull fedora`, or download directly to run on Atomic" -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Cloud Atomic Server WGs
On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 04:45:10PM -0400, Máirín Duffy wrote: > Just want to note that the user-facing edition offerings do not have > to reflect the SIG structure should a change happen. Good point. I hope we'd continue with Workstation, Server, and the planned Fedora Atomic/OpenShift cluster edition. -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Cloud Atomic Server WGs
On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 01:56:20PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > How about combine Cloud and Server WGs into a new WG with three new > sub groups: hardware, cloud, atomic? Interesting idea worth exploring. When we started with this, the thinking was that Server would be more for "pet" style systems with individual configuration and traditional hands-on systems administration, while Cloud would focus on newer devopsy approaches. But... maybe that's not so interesting anymore. Or, rather, maybe we can deliver one thing that handles both styles. I'd maybe suggest *four* subgroups: hardware, cloud/virt/vagrant, atomic host, and containers/modules. Or something like that. But that's details. -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: overlayfs for AFTER Fedora 25
On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 02:47:09PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > > Seems a little conservative, but I'm not opposed. > > I've been under the impression that part of the point of the Two Week > > Release cycle was to be able to deliver new stuff faster and fix > > issues faster but playing it safe isn't inherently a bad approach > > either. > When is F26 out? Next June. -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: overlayfs for AFTER Fedora 25
On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 01:55:16PM +0530, Kushal Das wrote: > For two week atomic we are not tied with the Fedora 25 release cycle. We > can enable it in our release when we think it is ready for the > consumers. It does not have to wait F26 release. For example we see it > is in good condition after one week of F25 release, we can then enable > it default in the next 2WA release. +1 -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Open 365 and SE linux
On Fri, Sep 09, 2016 at 09:56:34AM +0300, Benson Muite wrote: > Am looking at using Open 365 with fedora on cloud, but it seems to > require disabling SE linux: > https://github.com/Open365/Open365/ > Should this be needed? What would be the consequences of this? The consequence is less protection against possible attacks. I would suggest enabling it in permissive mode, and then finding what exactly is being blocked — and then, ideay, trying to get it fixed. -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Separate Repository for Atomic Specific Fedora-Dockerfiles
On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 11:47:35AM +0530, Trishna Guha wrote: > We have a repository on Github named Fedora-Dockerfiles [0]. The Repository > contains Dockerfiles but those are not **atomic** specific. > So adding ability to use **atomic** command will make **other hosts** lose > the ability to use the Dockerfiles. The Plan of Record is to move away from that repository and to a dist-git style collection of repositories as part of https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Layered_Docker_Image_Build_Service (possibly synced with github)? -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Proposal to test AMIs using Autocloud
On Thu, Sep 01, 2016 at 07:52:22PM +0530, Sayan Chowdhury wrote: > 4. If the test fails, Autocloud emits fedmsg message with topic > 'ami.failed. Fedimg also listens to this topic and deletes all the > AMis and related resources. Please make sure this last part is _very_ reliable. :) -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Don't overwrite Two Week Atomic (Ticket #147)
On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 05:43:28PM -0500, Adam Miller wrote: > Just a quick update, after some initial code review it was pointed out > that the "latest" target would be better handled via a web end point > that would auto-update with the data we're already providing via > fedmsg as part of the release process. I'm going to refactor the code > to only handle the N and N+1 stable release hosting and then work with > the websites team to handle the "latest" download target. Oh, that sounds like a good idea. Cool. -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Proposal: for F26, move Cloud Base Image to Server WG
On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 05:03:21PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote: > In this case, it's a combination of routing issue and bandwidth; the routing > issue here is that the people who watch the `anaconda` bugzilla entries don't > currently intersect much with Atomic Host. In general, please add me to > CC for any critical bugs you find. > Or alternatively, raise any blockers on the cloud@ or atomic-devel@ lists. As I understand it, AutoCloud creates these issues: https://pagure.io/atomic-images/issues We should probably subscribe one or both of those lists to those tickets. -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Proposal: for F26, move Cloud Base Image to Server WG
On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 04:43:50PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > There are a lot of images being produced and I have no idea if they're > really needed. That a release blocking image (cloud base qcow2) nearly > caused F25 alpha to slip because it was busted at least suggests it > probably shouldn't be release blocking anymore. FWIW, cloud base qcow2 > now gets grub2 in lieu of extlinux as the work around for the > breakage. Puts us back at 231M for the qcow2, instead of 195M for F24. Ah well; at least it boots. Rather than having the Cloud Base Image — or its Server-based successor — be blocking, I'd like to it as see an updated, automatically-tested two-week image. Ideally, we'd have a solid one on release day, but if we don't for some reason, it'd be less of a crisis. We also, obviously, have a process breakdown with what to do with failure reports from autocloud. -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
Proposal: for F26, move Cloud Base Image to Server WG
We've talked about this for a while, but let's make it formal. The plan is to transition from Cloud as a Fedora Edition to Something Container Clustery (see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Objectives/ProjectFAO). But, we still need cloud as a _deploy target_. The FAO-container-thing will continue to have cloud image deploy targets (as well as bare metal). I think it makes sense to _also_ have Fedora Server as a cloud deploy target. This could possibly be both a Fedora Server Minimal Cloud Image and Fedora Server Batteries Included Image — but that'd be up to Server WG, I think. Overall, I'm proposing: 1. Dissolve Cloud WG (See below; don't panic) 2. Form new Atomic WG or FAO WG (name to be bikeshedded) (a lot of overlap in membership with current Cloud WG, of course!) 3. _Keep_ Cloud SIG as a gathering point around cloud technology and covering shared underlying technology (fedimg, koji cloud image production, autocloud). Think of this as analogous in some ways to something like the ARM SIG. 4. Change https://getfedora.org/cloud/ to https://getfedora.org/atomic/ or https://getfedora.org/fao/ 5. Create new http://cloud.fedoraproject.org/ in the same style as https://arm.fedoraproject.org/ 6. New Atomic/FAO WG produces Whatever New Deliverable (starting with Two Week Atomic) 7. Cloud Base Image becomes base (uh, see what I did there?) for new Fedora Server cloud image (or images). 8. Vagrant image _probably_ the same — or maybe becomes its own thing? 9. ??? 10. Profit! -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Discussion on changing the name of Working Group
On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 08:07:08PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote: > One thing that has certainly been on my > mind is whether "Project Atomic" should dissolve more directly > into the distributions, a bit like how the "Modularity" effort is more > directly part of Fedora. I'm not sure though, because we still need > to maintain CentOS builds too. Anyways this is a huge topic =) I think that would probably help reduce the "too many things" confusion, and it might make it easier to get resources attached more directly to the Fedora work for areas that are currently bottlenecks here. And I think we can work directly with CentOS — we don't need to go through a third party to play nicely together. :) -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Discussion on changing the name of Working Group
On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 08:57:52PM +0530, Kushal Das wrote: > * If we rename how to make sure that the users know that we are not > abandoning the cloud? I've got a three-part answer to this part. First, this absolutely *is* a refocus on container tech for scale-out computing. That pretty much generally means "cloud taken for granted". Second, Fedora Cloud Base never really caught on. I know that there are some dedicated and serious users, but most people I'm aware of are using it as an easy way to spin up a minimal Fedora VM (and it's the _only_ way we provide an official vagrant image). That's very useful, but it wasn't the goal. There *are* people I'm aware of using it for actual cloud computing, but it's not taking the world by storm. Third, we're already in a kind of concerning state, with F25 cloud images not working since June and then here's the alpha deadline looming. We need to figure out something else about that *anyway*. > * If we create a new group, then who else are still interested about > helping out the Cloud WG? Generally, we have WGs for the editions and SIGs for spins and so on. Those things aren't unimportant, just less formal. And we, theoretically at least, hold the WGs to higher standards (like the requirement to produce PRD updates). > * 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. Yes — nothing to add here. > * Who will maintain Atomic workstation? If it is workstation wg, then > how to reduce duplication of efforts? I'm unclear if Atomic Workstation will actually be actually based on Project Atomic, be ostree and some similar technologies, but not really connected. In the latter case, I think that would be "one more thing named Atomic" in a confusing way, and it'd be better for that to have another name. But, if it is based on Atomic, I think we still have a clear separation, because as we discussed at the FAD and after, the plan here is to focus on what Josh and Adam dubbed "Project FAO" — a cluster solution and possibly full-on OpenShift. In that case, Fedora Atomic Host is a building block that could be shared and worked on by both the Atomic WG (or FAO WG, or whatever) and the Workstation WG. > * What will happen to the Cloud Base image? In my conception, there would still be a Cloud SIG, responsible for cloud image technologies. They'd help both the Atomic WG and Server WG produce and upload images to various cloud providers (where currently "various" is Amazon EC2 and Digital Ocean (which is awesome) because others are stalled on legal). Given what I've said above about my impression of common use of the current Fedora Cloud Base image, I think that artificat might well be replaced with a Fedora Server Minimal Install Cloud Image (or whatever terminology) > * Who will maintain the Vagrant images? If the answer to the above plays out like I expect, it seems to be well-aligned with Fedora Server. But Cloud WG could still help with testing and etc. > * 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. This effort is stalled and I don't have much hope. I think we might have better luck coming at it from a different direction anyway. I hope all of that makes sense! -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ cloud mailing list cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
