Re: Modular Kernel Packaging for Cloud
We initially planned to make the modular kernel packaging a self-contained change. But it now seems we also require changes to Anaconda and yum (and dnf?), so I think this change rather falls into the category of a system-wide change. According to the rules, I think it would still be possible to propose the change as a self-contained change IF we list owners of all affected packages. But changing kernel, anaconda and yum does seem rather critical to the whole system so I do think a system-wide change would be much more appropriate. More so since it might well be that the kernel split does affect more, as of yet unknown packages. Any objections to change the scope? -- Sandro ___ cloud mailing list cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Modular Kernel Packaging for Cloud
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 8:50 AM, Sandro red Mathys r...@fedoraproject.org wrote: We initially planned to make the modular kernel packaging a self-contained change. But it now seems we also require changes to Anaconda and yum (and dnf?), so I think this change rather falls into the category of a system-wide change. According to the rules, I think it would still be possible to propose the change as a self-contained change IF we list owners of all affected packages. But changing kernel, anaconda and yum does seem rather critical to the whole system so I do think a system-wide change would be much more appropriate. More so since it might well be that the kernel split does affect more, as of yet unknown packages. Any objections to change the scope? No objections. Even if this was just contained to the kernel I would have suggested a system-wide change anyway. The more scrutiny the better. josh ___ cloud mailing list cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
help wanted! please review ec2 quickstart docs
http://stg.fedoraproject.org/en/using/tutorials/ec2.html Don't worry about fonts or layout -- this is work in progress. Looking for feedback on content. Please send that to Robert Mayr (aka robyduck) via irc or email. Thanks! -- Matthew Miller-- Fedora Project--mat...@fedoraproject.org ___ cloud mailing list cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Heat and requirements for all-it-does-is-docker cloud image
This is a three part question. No, wait, one clarifying statement and two questions. Okay, one clarifying statement, one main question with many sub-questions, and then a bonus question. :) --- First, again, the primary Fedora Cloud image is going to continue to contain heat-cfntools, and python, and we won't migrate away from cloud-init without a replacement which covers what heat needs. So, this is just about a specialized image tailored for docker. --- So, the main question: given that Docker upstream is recommending Heat as the best way to do Docker in OpenStack, what are the minimal requirements on the image for doing that? Is there a way to preconfigure the image so that heat-cfntools aren't required? In that case, do we need #cloud-config formatted userdata or can we get away with the #! shell-script style? If it is #cloud-config, is a _subset_ of that syntax sufficient (as for example CoreOS does)? If we choose to go with rpm-ostree for the image itself, will Heat be foiled by a surprise lack of ability to install packages? (Not just no yum, but actually read-only /usr?) I know that CloudFormation can do all sorts of things, but which will it need to do in this case? And is there a way to present these limitations to users in a way that won't be confusing? (Including, I assume, pointing them to the general-purpose image if the Docker one isn't flexible enough.) --- And the bonus question: if in the F23 or F24 timeframe, we go full-on rpm-ostree for the primary image (while still keeping it basically general purpose), will the pkglayer concept (where groups of packages can be added on top) be sufficient? I assume that it is _required_, and the basic idea is that we would need to add support for it to cfn_helper.py -- and possibly to Amazon's CloudFormation stuff too. Would going this direction be _workable_ for Heat? --- Thanks! -- Matthew Miller-- Fedora Project--mat...@fedoraproject.org ___ cloud mailing list cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: help wanted! please review ec2 quickstart docs
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Matthew Miller mat...@fedoraproject.orgwrote: http://stg.fedoraproject.org/en/using/tutorials/ec2.html Don't worry about fonts or layout -- this is work in progress. Looking for feedback on content. Please send that to Robert Mayr (aka robyduck) via irc or email. I'd be happy to review this a bit later, and give feedback to robyduck. Just out of curiosity though, is any of this intended to make its way into the Cloud Guide? Or is Cloud Guide completely abandoned from the perspective of the Cloud SIG? -- Jared Smith ___ cloud mailing list cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: help wanted! please review ec2 quickstart docs
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Jared K. Smith jsm...@fedoraproject.orgwrote: Just out of curiosity though, is any of this intended to make its way into the Cloud Guide? Or is Cloud Guide completely abandoned from the perspective of the Cloud SIG? I really should have checked the Cloud Guide a bit closer before saying that -- it seems this page is pretty much a copy/paste from the Amazon EC2 section of the Cloud Guide. And when I went to check to see who had written that section of the Cloud Guide, I found that it was mostly me :-/ That still begs the question though -- does anybody else but me care about the Cloud Guide, or have any interest in working on it with me? -- Jared Smith ___ cloud mailing list cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Introduction and packaging for Marconi
Hello everyone, I'm Jon and I've created a package for the openstack marconi project [1]. As I'm not yet a member of the packaging team, I will need a sponsor for this package. Any feedback is much appreciated. [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1075822 -- Jon ___ cloud mailing list cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: help wanted! please review ec2 quickstart docs
On Mar 13, 2014 3:26 PM, Jared K. Smith jsm...@fedoraproject.org wrote: On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Jared K. Smith jsm...@fedoraproject.org wrote: Just out of curiosity though, is any of this intended to make its way into the Cloud Guide? Or is Cloud Guide completely abandoned from the perspective of the Cloud SIG? I really should have checked the Cloud Guide a bit closer before saying that -- it seems this page is pretty much a copy/paste from the Amazon EC2 section of the Cloud Guide. And when I went to check to see who had written that section of the Cloud Guide, I found that it was mostly me :-/ That still begs the question though -- does anybody else but me care about the Cloud Guide, or have any interest in working on it with me? -- Jared Smith I've poked at it in relatively recent history, and maybe even corrected the source for some of the things you've pointed out (or at least made notes :) Definitely something I'm interested in working on, but time and the experience gap have combined forces against me. -- Pete ___ cloud mailing list cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
