Re: The future of Fedora Server (was Re: Fedora 34 Change: Make Fedora CoreOS a Fedora Edition (System-Wide Change))
On Mon, 07 Dec 2020 10:21:35 -0600 Michael Catanzaro wrote: > On Sat, Dec 5, 2020 at 7:33 am, James Szinger > wrote: > > Undelivered -devel packages and modularity are killer anti-features > > of EL 8—it is way too hard to build the software I need. > > Honestly I don't think modularity is a serious problem for end users. > Missing -devel packages is unbelievably frustrating, though. And EPEL > just doesn't contain as much as Fedora does, in general. I find the modularity end-user documentation to be woefully inadequate, especially for developers. > So for personal servers... well, I've never seen Fedora Server broken > by automatic updates. I don't think I would use Fedora Server for > critical business infrastructure, but it works well enough for my > personal needs. The odds of encountering problems with Fedora are > simply way lower than the odds of discovering that EPEL lacks > something that I want, or an essential -devel package that doesn't > exist. I have found updates to Fedora server software to be less disruptive than the desktop updates. I also find many small updates easier to manage than a few big updates. Our sysadmin at work spent most of 2020 updating the server fleet from CentOS 6 to CentOS 8. My software was easy to deal with since I develop and test on Fedora. A good test suite is essential. Jim ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: The future of Fedora Server (was Re: Fedora 34 Change: Make Fedora CoreOS a Fedora Edition (System-Wide Change))
On Mon, Dec 07, 2020 at 08:44:37AM -0700, Ken Dreyer wrote: > It's too early to say that this hypothetical workflow is a replacement for > Fedora. Things still show up in RHEL 8 ahead of CentOS Stream. I don't suggest that it's a replacement, but it can be complementary. > > A strong Fedora Server edition means a strong RHEL Server. Absolutely! -- Matthew Miller Fedora Project Leader ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: The future of Fedora Server (was Re: Fedora 34 Change: Make Fedora CoreOS a Fedora Edition (System-Wide Change))
On Mon, Dec 07, 2020 at 11:41:01AM +0100, p...@uni-bremen.de wrote: > Well, where should we discuss further proceedings? Is it this generic > devel list, is it ser...@lists.fedoraproject.org? Another one? Yes, let's take it to that list. Everyone interested, join us over there. :) -- Matthew Miller Fedora Project Leader ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: The future of Fedora Server (was Re: Fedora 34 Change: Make Fedora CoreOS a Fedora Edition (System-Wide Change))
On Sat, Dec 5, 2020 at 7:33 am, James Szinger wrote: Undelivered -devel packages and modularity are killer anti-features of EL 8—it is way too hard to build the software I need. Honestly I don't think modularity is a serious problem for end users. Missing -devel packages is unbelievably frustrating, though. And EPEL just doesn't contain as much as Fedora does, in general. So for personal servers... well, I've never seen Fedora Server broken by automatic updates. I don't think I would use Fedora Server for critical business infrastructure, but it works well enough for my personal needs. The odds of encountering problems with Fedora are simply way lower than the odds of discovering that EPEL lacks something that I want, or an essential -devel package that doesn't exist. Michael ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: The future of Fedora Server (was Re: Fedora 34 Change: Make Fedora CoreOS a Fedora Edition (System-Wide Change))
On Fri, Dec 4, 2020, 3:25 PM Matthew Miller wrote: > On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 02:16:23PM -0800, Japheth Cleaver wrote: > > be a better-engineered and tested option. But as time goes on and > > the next EL release isn't either isn't announced or isn't stable > > enough to rely on, Fedora Server probably sees more use as a > > quasi-stable release base.. This fills a real need when your users > > are absolutely clamoring for things that aren't likely to be > > backported into the stable EL release and you don't want to have to > > send them into Ubuntu/Debian land (or have them grab an > > un-administered container off the shelf). > > Yeah, we may have an opportunity to do this better with CentOS Stream. > Starting with RHEL 8, there's no more "next EL isn't announced" -- instead, > they're every three years. So, we know when Fedora ELN is going to flow > into > CentOS Stream and from there to RHEL. We could actually position and label > each Fedora Server release by where it fits on the wave of that cadence. > It's too early to say that this hypothetical workflow is a replacement for Fedora. Things still show up in RHEL 8 ahead of CentOS Stream. A strong Fedora Server edition means a strong RHEL Server. - Ken > ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: The future of Fedora Server (was Re: Fedora 34 Change: Make Fedora CoreOS a Fedora Edition (System-Wide Change))
> Am 04.12.2020 um 20:33 schrieb Matthew Miller : > >> ... >> Just in case it is indeed considered useful and desirable I could >> contribute various Fedora Server related/specific documentations and >> how-to's, e.g. an annotated step-by-step guide to setup a basic server >> which can get extended for various purposes, how to set up a Postgres >> server on top of a basic server, an infrastructure for vm’s and containers >> (including scripts and ansible templates), troubleshooting guides, and >> other topics like that (mostly practical but always together with >> preliminary strategic considerations). Just let me know. > > > Absolutely! A functioning Working Group needs people interested in and doing > these kinds of things too, not just package maintenance. So if you're > interested, you'd absolutely be welcome in a re-constituted Fedora Server > WG. Well, where should we discuss further proceedings? Is it this generic devel list, is it ser...@lists.fedoraproject.org? Another one? First of all we need content, of course, but we also need some planning beforehand. - How to set things in motion, - where we want which documentation be published (under Releases, Quick Doc, dedicated area in https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/docs/, or wiki entries at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Project_Wiki?rd=Fedora_Project_Wiki/en), - where can drafts be discussed before publication, - contact with the Doc project to name but a few. > -- > Matthew Miller > > Fedora Project Leader ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: The future of Fedora Server (was Re: Fedora 34 Change: Make Fedora CoreOS a Fedora Edition (System-Wide Change))
On Sat, 5 Dec 2020 01:24:22 +0100 p...@uni-bremen.de wrote: > I see advantages sui generis in Fedora Server over CentOS, not "just" > an interim solution or workaround until the next CentOS version is > released. You get (almost) all the positive features that make CentOS > /RHEL stand out (well thought-out architecture and workflows, > security, systematic tools, etc.) and additionally > - more up-to-date application software, which often enables a better > response to current developments and changing requirements > - easier administration due to a greater variety of available packages > - shorter release jumps, which are therefore less disruptive > - easier (quasi rolling) updates (dnf update), which save a lot of > time > - Freedom from strict RH feature management (example BTRFS, XEN some > years ago) > - greater backwards hardware compatibility (e.g. exclusion of drivers > in el 8, which make some older hardware unusable or only very > difficult to use) > > The list can easily be extended. I totally agree. I used to use CentOS for server applications, but with the release of RHEL/CentOS 8, I’ve been moving toward Fedora. Undelivered -devel packages and modularity are killer anti-features of EL 8—it is way too hard to build the software I need. Whereas Fedora packages much more software, so I spend less time building dependencies, and the tooling is there to build what I need. With Fedora my salary goes more to adding value and less on reinventing the wheel. I don’t use Fedora Server directly. Instead I build container or VMs with a custom RPM set. The existence of Fedora Server Edition provides confidence that Fedora is a suitable and tested platform for server applications. Jim ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: The future of Fedora Server (was Re: Fedora 34 Change: Make Fedora CoreOS a Fedora Edition (System-Wide Change))
> Am 04.12.2020 um 23:16 schrieb Japheth Cleaver : > > On 12/4/2020 12:35 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: >> >> ... >> >> For the people who were using it as servers, it was split between getting >> ready for the next RHEL/CentOS they would be deploying, they needed packages >> which were not in EPEL, or things like python/nodejs/etc was new enough for >> what they needed to run but wasn't in EL8. >> > It would be interesting to consider how Fedora Server use cases change over > time during an EL release cycle. > > For many server use cases where the box is NOT ephemeral, when CentOS and > Fedora are similar, it's likely that CentOS is going to be a > better-engineered and tested option. But as time goes on and the next EL > release isn't either isn't announced or isn't stable enough to rely on, > Fedora Server probably sees more use as a quasi-stable release base.. This > fills a real need when your users are absolutely clamoring for things that > aren't likely to be backported into the stable EL release and you don't > want to have to send them into Ubuntu/Debian land (or have them grab an > un-administered container off the shelf). Fedora has advantages not only when RHELx / CentOSx is matured, but in some cases already at release time, when some important components are already „behind“, e.g. postfix / dovecot with CentOS 8 regarding SNI and submission (which are quite important features in a containerised world). And with the current rapid development, even small version differences can be important. > In fact, Fedora Server as a "not EL, but better than nothing as a temporarily > stable platform" during these later periods could be a useful niche to fill. > Bonus points for some of those extended support duration/stable discussions > from a few years ago. I see advantages sui generis in Fedora Server over CentOS, not "just" an interim solution or workaround until the next CentOS version is released. You get (almost) all the positive features that make CentOS /RHEL stand out (well thought-out architecture and workflows, security, systematic tools, etc.) and additionally - more up-to-date application software, which often enables a better response to current developments and changing requirements - easier administration due to a greater variety of available packages - shorter release jumps, which are therefore less disruptive - easier (quasi rolling) updates (dnf update), which save a lot of time - Freedom from strict RH feature management (example BTRFS, XEN some years ago) - greater backwards hardware compatibility (e.g. exclusion of drivers in el 8, which make some older hardware unusable or only very difficult to use) The list can easily be extended. -- Dr. Peter Boy p...@boy-digital.de p...@uni-bremen.de ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: The future of Fedora Server (was Re: Fedora 34 Change: Make Fedora CoreOS a Fedora Edition (System-Wide Change))
> Am 04.12.2020 um 20:33 schrieb Matthew Miller : > > On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 07:53:12PM +0100, p...@uni-bremen.de wrote: >> Just in case it is indeed considered useful and desirable I could >> contribute various Fedora Server related/specific documentations and >> how-to's, e.g. an annotated step-by-step guide to setup a basic server >> which can get extended for various purposes, how to set up a Postgres >> server on top of a basic server, an infrastructure for vm’s and containers >> (including scripts and ansible templates), troubleshooting guides, and >> other topics like that (mostly practical but always together with >> preliminary strategic considerations). Just let me know. > > > Absolutely! A functioning Working Group needs people interested in and doing > these kinds of things too, not just package maintenance. So if you're > interested, you'd absolutely be welcome in a re-constituted Fedora Server > WG. OK, I would like to participate and contribute to the documentary side. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: The future of Fedora Server (was Re: Fedora 34 Change: Make Fedora CoreOS a Fedora Edition (System-Wide Change))
On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 02:16:23PM -0800, Japheth Cleaver wrote: > be a better-engineered and tested option. But as time goes on and > the next EL release isn't either isn't announced or isn't stable > enough to rely on, Fedora Server probably sees more use as a > quasi-stable release base.. This fills a real need when your users > are absolutely clamoring for things that aren't likely to be > backported into the stable EL release and you don't want to have to > send them into Ubuntu/Debian land (or have them grab an > un-administered container off the shelf). Yeah, we may have an opportunity to do this better with CentOS Stream. Starting with RHEL 8, there's no more "next EL isn't announced" -- instead, they're every three years. So, we know when Fedora ELN is going to flow into CentOS Stream and from there to RHEL. We could actually position and label each Fedora Server release by where it fits on the wave of that cadence. -- Matthew Miller Fedora Project Leader ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: The future of Fedora Server (was Re: Fedora 34 Change: Make Fedora CoreOS a Fedora Edition (System-Wide Change))
On 12/4/2020 12:35 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: Anecdata which is as 'useful' as any other. Most of the people I have dealt with in the last 4 years with Server have been using it mainly as a replacement for the Everything DVD and because it was the most 'un-opinionated' release of Fedora. It wasn't actually being used in any more of a server release as much as a 'get out of my way' while still using Fedora. For the people who were using it as servers, it was split between getting ready for the next RHEL/CentOS they would be deploying, they needed packages which were not in EPEL, or things like python/nodejs/etc was new enough for what they needed to run but wasn't in EL8. It would be interesting to consider how Fedora Server use cases change over time during an EL release cycle. For many server use cases where the box is NOT ephemeral, when CentOS and Fedora are similar, it's likely that CentOS is going to be a better-engineered and tested option. But as time goes on and the next EL release isn't either isn't announced or isn't stable enough to rely on, Fedora Server probably sees more use as a quasi-stable release base.. This fills a real need when your users are absolutely clamoring for things that aren't likely to be backported into the stable EL release and you don't want to have to send them into Ubuntu/Debian land (or have them grab an un-administered container off the shelf). In fact, Fedora Server as a "not EL, but better than nothing as a temporarily stable platform" during these later periods could be a useful niche to fill. Bonus points for some of those extended support duration/stable discussions from a few years ago. Ultimately, however, I feel like the use case of Fedora Server is inexorably tied to the RHEL/CentOS (or CentOS Stream) discussions. And a Fedora WG that tries to do long-term planning and positioning needs to be part of those overall discussions for the greater good of the RedHat ecosystem. Short term marketing is fine, but the different sides of RedHat need to be on the same page about this all. -jc ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: The future of Fedora Server (was Re: Fedora 34 Change: Make Fedora CoreOS a Fedora Edition (System-Wide Change))
Am 04.12.20 um 21:35 schrieb Stephen John Smoogen: Anecdata which is as 'useful' as any other. just some additional experience from my side: - Fedora provides a recent PHP (unlike RHEL 7) but also ships the full PHP stack required to run popular PHP applications like WordPress/NextCloud/... AFAIK due to modularity and build-only RPMs it is still quite hard (on RHEL 8) to get PHP-related rpms required to deploy these PHP applications. With Fedora it works like a breeze. - Fedora works well, no breaking updates in our server use - also a lot of recent tech available: wireguard, systemd daemons Felix ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: The future of Fedora Server (was Re: Fedora 34 Change: Make Fedora CoreOS a Fedora Edition (System-Wide Change))
On Friday, 04 December 2020 at 20:51, Josh Boyer wrote: [...] > For those using it for traditional server use cases, why? What about > it do you find better than something like CentOS? Here are my reasons, in no particular order: 1. Because that's what I use on my desktops. 2. Because latest software versions. 3. Because I don't have to maintain all the packages I'm interested in for EPEL, too. 4. Because it works so well. Regards, Dominik -- Fedora https://getfedora.org | RPM Fusion http://rpmfusion.org There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and oppression to develop psychic muscles. -- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: The future of Fedora Server (was Re: Fedora 34 Change: Make Fedora CoreOS a Fedora Edition (System-Wide Change))
On Fri, 4 Dec 2020 at 15:17, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 02:51:45PM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > > It would be interesting if we had a set of use cases Fedora Server > > actually solves. So far in this thread we've seen people use it, but > > it reads to me like they use it to get a boiled down installation of > > Fedora. So is Fedora Server just a convenient way to get a quick and > > simple Fedora installation (e.g. you're using it because it's > > *Fedora*), or do people actually use it for traditional server use > > cases. > > > > For those using it for traditional server use cases, why? What about > > it do you find better than something like CentOS? > > Yeah, this is absolutely another valuable idea. The Use Cases and Personas > at > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Server/Product_Requirements_Document#User_Profiles.2C_Primary_Use_Cases_and_Goals > were created *seven* years ago and reflect aspiration, not nessarily > reality. So it would be very valuable for interested people to update that > to reflect both actual current use and the current aspirations. > > > Anecdata which is as 'useful' as any other. Most of the people I have dealt with in the last 4 years with Server have been using it mainly as a replacement for the Everything DVD and because it was the most 'un-opinionated' release of Fedora. It wasn't actually being used in any more of a server release as much as a 'get out of my way' while still using Fedora. For the people who were using it as servers, it was split between getting ready for the next RHEL/CentOS they would be deploying, they needed packages which were not in EPEL, or things like python/nodejs/etc was new enough for what they needed to run but wasn't in EL8. > -- > Matthew Miller > > Fedora Project Leader > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > -- Stephen J Smoogen. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: The future of Fedora Server (was Re: Fedora 34 Change: Make Fedora CoreOS a Fedora Edition (System-Wide Change))
On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 02:51:45PM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > It would be interesting if we had a set of use cases Fedora Server > actually solves. So far in this thread we've seen people use it, but > it reads to me like they use it to get a boiled down installation of > Fedora. So is Fedora Server just a convenient way to get a quick and > simple Fedora installation (e.g. you're using it because it's > *Fedora*), or do people actually use it for traditional server use > cases. > > For those using it for traditional server use cases, why? What about > it do you find better than something like CentOS? Yeah, this is absolutely another valuable idea. The Use Cases and Personas at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Server/Product_Requirements_Document#User_Profiles.2C_Primary_Use_Cases_and_Goals were created *seven* years ago and reflect aspiration, not nessarily reality. So it would be very valuable for interested people to update that to reflect both actual current use and the current aspirations. -- Matthew Miller Fedora Project Leader ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: The future of Fedora Server (was Re: Fedora 34 Change: Make Fedora CoreOS a Fedora Edition (System-Wide Change))
On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 2:33 PM Matthew Miller wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 07:53:12PM +0100, p...@uni-bremen.de wrote: > > I’m not a maintainer but I use Fedora Server for a lot of our university > > research institutions infrastructure (and I’m a dormant member of Fedora > > docs). > > > > Just in case it is indeed considered useful and desirable I could > > contribute various Fedora Server related/specific documentations and > > how-to's, e.g. an annotated step-by-step guide to setup a basic server > > which can get extended for various purposes, how to set up a Postgres > > server on top of a basic server, an infrastructure for vm’s and containers > > (including scripts and ansible templates), troubleshooting guides, and > > other topics like that (mostly practical but always together with > > preliminary strategic considerations). Just let me know. > > > Absolutely! A functioning Working Group needs people interested in and doing > these kinds of things too, not just package maintenance. So if you're > interested, you'd absolutely be welcome in a re-constituted Fedora Server > WG. It would be interesting if we had a set of use cases Fedora Server actually solves. So far in this thread we've seen people use it, but it reads to me like they use it to get a boiled down installation of Fedora. So is Fedora Server just a convenient way to get a quick and simple Fedora installation (e.g. you're using it because it's *Fedora*), or do people actually use it for traditional server use cases. For those using it for traditional server use cases, why? What about it do you find better than something like CentOS? josh ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: The future of Fedora Server (was Re: Fedora 34 Change: Make Fedora CoreOS a Fedora Edition (System-Wide Change))
On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 07:53:12PM +0100, p...@uni-bremen.de wrote: > I’m not a maintainer but I use Fedora Server for a lot of our university > research institutions infrastructure (and I’m a dormant member of Fedora > docs). > > Just in case it is indeed considered useful and desirable I could > contribute various Fedora Server related/specific documentations and > how-to's, e.g. an annotated step-by-step guide to setup a basic server > which can get extended for various purposes, how to set up a Postgres > server on top of a basic server, an infrastructure for vm’s and containers > (including scripts and ansible templates), troubleshooting guides, and > other topics like that (mostly practical but always together with > preliminary strategic considerations). Just let me know. Absolutely! A functioning Working Group needs people interested in and doing these kinds of things too, not just package maintenance. So if you're interested, you'd absolutely be welcome in a re-constituted Fedora Server WG. -- Matthew Miller Fedora Project Leader ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: The future of Fedora Server (was Re: Fedora 34 Change: Make Fedora CoreOS a Fedora Edition (System-Wide Change))
> Am 04.12.2020 um 19:08 schrieb Matthew Miller : > > It's not a matter of making changes for change's own sake, but I would hope > that we'd have some level of innovation and experimentation in Fedora > Server. There are also just normal things like marketing materials, > promotion, blog posts, docs, etc., that can use ongoing work. > I’m not a maintainer but I use Fedora Server for a lot of our university research institutions infrastructure (and I’m a dormant member of Fedora docs). Just in case it is indeed considered useful and desirable I could contribute various Fedora Server related/specific documentations and how-to's, e.g. an annotated step-by-step guide to setup a basic server which can get extended for various purposes, how to set up a Postgres server on top of a basic server, an infrastructure for vm’s and containers (including scripts and ansible templates), troubleshooting guides, and other topics like that (mostly practical but always together with preliminary strategic considerations). Just let me know. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: The future of Fedora Server (was Re: Fedora 34 Change: Make Fedora CoreOS a Fedora Edition (System-Wide Change))
On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 11:59:17AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > > No one is talking about making it go away, just de-editioning it. I'd > > definitely prefer it to remain an edition, but we need it to be more active > > for that to work. > Having an active team is one thing, but making changes just because is > quite another. I don't feel it's worth demoting Fedora Server (just > like I didn't like what happened to Fedora Cloud way back when with > Atomic). But if you need me to be there to keep the WG going so it > doesn't get demoted, I'm happy to help shepherd it. It's not a matter of making changes for change's own sake, but I would hope that we'd have some level of innovation and experimentation in Fedora Server. There are also just normal things like marketing materials, promotion, blog posts, docs, etc., that can use ongoing work. -- Matthew Miller Fedora Project Leader ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: The future of Fedora Server (was Re: Fedora 34 Change: Make Fedora CoreOS a Fedora Edition (System-Wide Change))
I'm not part of the server WG, but a super interested user. Count me in to help if needed. Br, El vie, 4 dic 2020 a las 14:00, Neal Gompa () escribió: > On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 11:49 AM Matthew Miller > wrote: > > > > On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 10:03:24AM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > > I agree, sign me up! I've been using Fedora Server for years for my > > > own projects and it's been 99.9% flawless, so I would be sad if it > > > went away. > > > > No one is talking about making it go away, just de-editioning it. I'd > > definitely prefer it to remain an edition, but we need it to be more > active > > for that to work. > > > > Having an active team is one thing, but making changes just because is > quite another. I don't feel it's worth demoting Fedora Server (just > like I didn't like what happened to Fedora Cloud way back when with > Atomic). But if you need me to be there to keep the WG going so it > doesn't get demoted, I'm happy to help shepherd it. > > > > -- > 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > -- Eduard Lucena Móvil: +56962318010 GNU/Linux User #589060 Ubuntu User #8749 Fedora Marketing Representative ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: The future of Fedora Server (was Re: Fedora 34 Change: Make Fedora CoreOS a Fedora Edition (System-Wide Change))
On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 11:49 AM Matthew Miller wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 10:03:24AM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > I agree, sign me up! I've been using Fedora Server for years for my > > own projects and it's been 99.9% flawless, so I would be sad if it > > went away. > > No one is talking about making it go away, just de-editioning it. I'd > definitely prefer it to remain an edition, but we need it to be more active > for that to work. > Having an active team is one thing, but making changes just because is quite another. I don't feel it's worth demoting Fedora Server (just like I didn't like what happened to Fedora Cloud way back when with Atomic). But if you need me to be there to keep the WG going so it doesn't get demoted, I'm happy to help shepherd it. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: The future of Fedora Server (was Re: Fedora 34 Change: Make Fedora CoreOS a Fedora Edition (System-Wide Change))
On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 10:03:24AM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: > I agree, sign me up! I've been using Fedora Server for years for my > own projects and it's been 99.9% flawless, so I would be sad if it > went away. No one is talking about making it go away, just de-editioning it. I'd definitely prefer it to remain an edition, but we need it to be more active for that to work. -- Matthew Miller Fedora Project Leader ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: The future of Fedora Server (was Re: Fedora 34 Change: Make Fedora CoreOS a Fedora Edition (System-Wide Change))
On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 6:48 PM Ben Cotton wrote: > > On Wed, 2020-12-02 at 11:14 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > > > There were a number of people interested in helping with reviving the > > Server WG, myself included. But we don't know how to have that move > > forward. We've never really had a situation like this before... > > > I'd start with staging a takeover of https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Server > > It looks like there are no meeting logs in the last two years, so I > don't think you'll get much pushback. > > I talked to sgallagh before posing this question, so I don't expect > you'll get any pushback. If anything, you'll probably make people > happy. :-) I agree, sign me up! I've been using Fedora Server for years for my own projects and it's been 99.9% flawless, so I would be sad if it went away. Fabio ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: The future of Fedora Server (was Re: Fedora 34 Change: Make Fedora CoreOS a Fedora Edition (System-Wide Change))
On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 12:52 PM Ben Cotton wrote: > > On Wed, 2020-12-02 at 11:14 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > > > There were a number of people interested in helping with reviving the > > Server WG, myself included. But we don't know how to have that move > > forward. We've never really had a situation like this before... > > > I'd start with staging a takeover of https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Server > > It looks like there are no meeting logs in the last two years, so I > don't think you'll get much pushback. > > I talked to sgallagh before posing this question, so I don't expect > you'll get any pushback. If anything, you'll probably make people > happy. :-) > > On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 12:30 PM Adam Williamson > wrote: > > > > I'm not sure it's really warranted, to be honest. A counterpoint is > > that you can consider Server to be sort of dormant *because it works*. > > Is "it still works" sufficient to keep a deliverable at the forefront? > Obviously we want what we ship to work, whether it's an Edition or > bex's Llama Herder Lab. But what is Server doing to move the state of > the art forward? Server is a slightly different case in that generally > you don't want servers to be too adventurous, but if it's in statis, > should it be a flagship? > > Like I said above, the Server WG appears to be in zombie state for at > least the last two years. Is Fedora Server doing what it should be > doing now, or is it doing what it should have done two years ago? IMO, yes. I am a silent consumer of it. It provides a non-graphical default Fedora installation that just works as a target for various automated deployments (e.g., qemu + ansible). For both work and non-work deployments of Fedora on VMs, Fedora Server is my default mechanism to do so (whether on local libvirt or remote cloud deployments). I'm not sure it really needs much care and feeding -- a boring packaging of Fedora with some bare necessities and without any graphical tooling doesn't need much management or steering. Changing what is shipped in the base Server distribution frequently is an anti-feature. That I haven't had any Server-specific bugs or issues is a good thing. > > Of course, we can keep publishing Server images and providing those > > capabilities without calling it an Edition, but...I'm not sure it just > > being sort of quiet and undramatic necessarily merits that, especially > > if we don't have clear replacements for its capabilities yet. > > I'm certainly not advocating we drop Server entirely. But we should > evaluate its place in Fedora, particularly if there's no one providing > active care and feeding. I'd much rather see the Server WG come back > to life and keep it as an Edition. The care and feeding of a Fedora Server edition, IMO, shouldn't come from changes in content curation, but all the packagers involved in maintenance of packages shipped by the edition. My 2c. Alex > > -- > Ben Cotton > He / Him / His > Senior Program Manager, Fedora & CentOS Stream > Red Hat > TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
The future of Fedora Server (was Re: Fedora 34 Change: Make Fedora CoreOS a Fedora Edition (System-Wide Change))
On Wed, 2020-12-02 at 11:14 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > There were a number of people interested in helping with reviving the > Server WG, myself included. But we don't know how to have that move > forward. We've never really had a situation like this before... > I'd start with staging a takeover of https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Server It looks like there are no meeting logs in the last two years, so I don't think you'll get much pushback. I talked to sgallagh before posing this question, so I don't expect you'll get any pushback. If anything, you'll probably make people happy. :-) On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 12:30 PM Adam Williamson wrote: > > I'm not sure it's really warranted, to be honest. A counterpoint is > that you can consider Server to be sort of dormant *because it works*. Is "it still works" sufficient to keep a deliverable at the forefront? Obviously we want what we ship to work, whether it's an Edition or bex's Llama Herder Lab. But what is Server doing to move the state of the art forward? Server is a slightly different case in that generally you don't want servers to be too adventurous, but if it's in statis, should it be a flagship? Like I said above, the Server WG appears to be in zombie state for at least the last two years. Is Fedora Server doing what it should be doing now, or is it doing what it should have done two years ago? > Of course, we can keep publishing Server images and providing those > capabilities without calling it an Edition, but...I'm not sure it just > being sort of quiet and undramatic necessarily merits that, especially > if we don't have clear replacements for its capabilities yet. I'm certainly not advocating we drop Server entirely. But we should evaluate its place in Fedora, particularly if there's no one providing active care and feeding. I'd much rather see the Server WG come back to life and keep it as an Edition. -- Ben Cotton He / Him / His Senior Program Manager, Fedora & CentOS Stream Red Hat TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
