Re: [cloud] #84: Care and Feeding, Fedora Dockerfiles
#84: Care and Feeding, Fedora Dockerfiles ---+ Reporter: mattdm | Owner: jzb Type: task | Status: assigned Priority: normal | Milestone: Fedora 22 Component: Collaboration Communication | Resolution: Keywords: meeting| ---+ Comment (by mattdm): Replying to [comment:17 adimania]: If all we want is a way to try building the image from the dockerfile and mark as successful if image is built, then I can write a script to look for Dockerfile and do the needful. But if the idea is to check the sanity of the image, for example, fire up containers from the image and check if the image is working as '''expected''', then it can be a tough deal. Not speaking for Scott, but I it'd be very helpful to start with that simple build check, and then go more complicated for there. (Let's not let complicated end goals stop us from doing the quick things now.) -- Ticket URL: https://fedorahosted.org/cloud/ticket/84#comment:18 cloud https://fedorahosted.org/cloud Fedora Cloud Working Group Ticketing System ___ cloud mailing list cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: [cloud] #84: Care and Feeding, Fedora Dockerfiles
#84: Care and Feeding, Fedora Dockerfiles ---+ Reporter: mattdm | Owner: jzb Type: task | Status: assigned Priority: normal | Milestone: Fedora 22 Component: Collaboration Communication | Resolution: Keywords: meeting| ---+ Comment (by adimania): Replying to [comment:16 scollier]: We need someone to test the conversion to DNF. I also would like to bring up CI again here. That would help immensely. What is the goal of CI? If all we want is a way to try building the image from the dockerfile and mark as successful if image is built, then I can write a script to look for Dockerfile and do the needful. But if the idea is to check the sanity of the image, for example, fire up containers from the image and check if the image is working as '''expected''', then it can be a tough deal. -- Ticket URL: https://fedorahosted.org/cloud/ticket/84#comment:17 cloud https://fedorahosted.org/cloud Fedora Cloud Working Group Ticketing System ___ cloud mailing list cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: [cloud] #14: Investigate systemd-networkd
#14: Investigate systemd-networkd --+ Reporter: mattdm| Owner: kushal Type: task | Status: accepted Priority: normal| Milestone: Fedora 21 (Alpha) Component: Cloud Base Image | Resolution: Keywords: meeting | --+ Comment (by mhayden): Kushal and I talked about this proposal in detail at Flock for the cloud images. While it's great for server devices that aren't going to be moving around often, it's not ideal for laptops or desktops that change their physical location frequently. NetworkManager makes a lot more sense there. I spoke with zbyszek about improving the documentation around systemd- networkd as well. Much of the documentation is very focused and doesn't speak to full use cases where you're creating multiple .netdev and .network (and perhaps .link) files. With that said, I've been using systemd-networkd instead of NetworkManager on 10-20 production cloud instances, over 250 hypervisors, and several other physical systems since Fedora 21. Other than the bonding shenanigans (fixed in systemd 216), I haven't seen any issues. -- Ticket URL: https://fedorahosted.org/cloud/ticket/14#comment:45 cloud https://fedorahosted.org/cloud Fedora Cloud Working Group Ticketing System ___ cloud mailing list cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
