On 03/13/2015 02:04 PM, Michael P. McGrath wrote:
I get that there are several offerings that Fedora has, I don't feel
compelled to list them all on projectatomic.io to people who likely won't
have the information to make an informed decision anyway. We pick one
for them, give a few word
On 03/13/2015 02:20 PM, Michael P. McGrath wrote:
Perhaps we're already aligned then. What would Fedora pick as its 'best'
Atomic release and how often does it get released?
Not exclusively my call, of course, but I would choose the rapid-release
version over a version that follows the
Greetings fellow cloudies!
This bug (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1201655) spawned a
conversation on IRC that we thought should be moved here to the list.
With the migration from yum to dnf in full swing, we've got to figure
out what the intent translates to regarding packages
On Friday, March 13, 2015 03:05:37 PM David Gay wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Mike Ruckman ro...@fedoraproject.org
To: Fedora Cloud SIG cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2015 11:29:28 AM
Subject: dnf migration period
Greetings fellow cloudies!
- Original Message -
From: Joe Brockmeier j...@redhat.com
To: Michael P. McGrath mmcgr...@redhat.com, Fedora Cloud SIG
cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2015 1:16:41 PM
Subject: Re: Atomic 2 week releases
On 03/13/2015 02:04 PM, Michael P. McGrath wrote:
I
- Original Message -
From: Mike Ruckman ro...@fedoraproject.org
To: Fedora Cloud SIG cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2015 11:29:28 AM
Subject: dnf migration period
Greetings fellow cloudies!
This bug (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1201655)
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 03:53:06PM -0400, Dusty Mabe wrote:
Either way Fedora as a whole should take a consistent approach. I
think if we deliberately add yum to our kickstart then the other
products should do the same (even if it is currently being brought in
by a dependency in some products
For cloud images I don't have a problem with dnf-only or dnf-plus-yum.
But for a *Docker* image having both dnf and yum or both python2 and
python3 is going to be a nightmare for me - the base images will be
too big.
I'm guessing it's too late in the F22 release cycle for major changes
on the
On 03/13/2015 02:58 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 02:26:42PM -0400, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
We are on the hook for an Atomic Host release for F22, but I think I'd
rather message why we're putting our weight behind a rapid-release host
based on Fedora than dealing with two
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 05:13:29PM -0400, Michael P. McGrath wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Ian McLeod imcl...@fedoraproject.org
To: cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2015 4:08:46 PM
Subject: Re: Atomic 2 week releases
On 03/13/2015 02:58 PM, Matthew
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 02:26:42PM -0400, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
We are on the hook for an Atomic Host release for F22, but I think I'd
rather message why we're putting our weight behind a rapid-release host
based on Fedora than dealing with two competing Fedora-based offerings.
Has the spinner
- Original Message -
From: Ian McLeod imcl...@fedoraproject.org
To: cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2015 4:08:46 PM
Subject: Re: Atomic 2 week releases
On 03/13/2015 02:58 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 02:26:42PM -0400, Joe Brockmeier
# F22 Blocker Review meeting
# Date: 2015-03-16
# Time: 1600 UTC
# Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.freenode.net
It's coming up to that time of the week again: Blocker Review! Currently
we have 5/1 proposed blockers for Beta and Final. Again, we're meeting
at 1600 UTC right after the QA
13 matches
Mail list logo
