FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Advisory Board

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 03-31-2008, 01:23 PM
"Paul W. Frields"
 
Default Spins proposals

Jeff Spaleta has been kind enough to post his spin proposals on the wiki
for easier reading and comment. The main proposal is at:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JefSpaleta/SpinReleaseProcessProposal

There are supplemental addenda at:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JefSpaleta/SpinReleaseProcessAmendments
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JefSpaleta/CommunityHostedSpins

--
Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/
gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 03-31-2008, 03:03 PM
Jeroen van Meeuwen
 
Default Spins proposals

Paul W. Frields wrote:

Jeff Spaleta has been kind enough to post his spin proposals on the wiki
for easier reading and comment. The main proposal is at:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JefSpaleta/SpinReleaseProcessProposal


There are supplemental addenda at:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JefSpaleta/SpinReleaseProcessAmendments
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JefSpaleta/CommunityHostedSpins



Is the installation media spins that Unity does to be captured with this
process as well, or does this only apply to Live Spins (could that be
clarified in the proposal)?


Kind regards,

Jeroen van Meeuwen
-kanarip

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 03-31-2008, 04:57 PM
"Jeff Spaleta"
 
Default Spins proposals

On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 7:03 AM, Jeroen van Meeuwen <kanarip@kanarip.com> wrote:

Is the installation media spins that Unity does to be captured with this

process as well, or does this only apply to Live Spins (could that be

clarified in the proposal)?


The intent was to leave the definition of 'spin' concept as broad as possible.* I don't think there is anything in the base proposal which raises the bar higher for installation media spins than for live images.*


-jef



_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 03-31-2008, 07:37 PM
Jeroen van Meeuwen
 
Default Spins proposals

Jeff Spaleta wrote:



On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 7:03 AM, Jeroen van Meeuwen <kanarip@kanarip.com
<mailto:kanarip@kanarip.com>> wrote:


Is the installation media spins that Unity does to be captured with this
process as well, or does this only apply to Live Spins (could that be
clarified in the proposal)?


The intent was to leave the definition of 'spin' concept as broad as
possible. I don't think there is anything in the base proposal which
raises the bar higher for installation media spins than for live images.



Well, should Unity remain to be able to release Re-Spins the way they do
then we'll maybe need an exemption to a couple of rules set forth in the
proposal;


On the Release Selection process:

Spin concepts:

- "can be proposed to Release Engineering for inclusion in the next
Fedora release"


Unity Re-Spins tend to not align with Fedora releases.

- "are built as part of the next Fedora release cycle"

Same here.

On the role of Release Engineering:

- "reviews each proposed spin for release and does the final spin image
composing for all released spins and update spins as they appear in the
torrent server and mirrors"


The type of configuration used by the tools currently used by Release
Engineering do not accept the kind of configuration a Re-Spin might
need. Nor, judging from the comments on a proposal a long time ago, does
upstream for those tools accept the type of configuration it might take
to compose a Re-Spin with, given that -supposedly- it would not be
reproducible.


Hence, during the compose process manual intervention might be required.
Insert here a reminder of the reproducibility argument used earlier.


Other then the above if all it applies to is Installation and Live Spins
to-be-released-by-the-Fedora-Project-proper, I fully agree with the
proposal. I sure hope though, should this proposal be accepted, it won't
be held against us all of a sudden.


Kind regards,

Jeroen van Meeuwen
-kanarip

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 03-31-2008, 08:07 PM
"Jeff Spaleta"
 
Default Spins proposals

On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 11:37 AM, Jeroen van Meeuwen <kanarip@kanarip.com> wrote:

Well, should Unity remain to be able to release Re-Spins the way they do

then we'll maybe need an exemption to a couple of rules set forth in the

proposal;



On the Release Selection process:



Spin concepts:



- "can be proposed to Release Engineering for inclusion in the next

Fedora release"



Unity Re-Spins tend to not align with Fedora releases.


Anything that is meant to be given official hosting space needs to run through a proposal process that is synced with the release schedule. Even if the purpose of the spin being proposed is such that it will not have images at release time, but will only have update images.** Everything that will consume project hosting resources needs to be on the table at release time with space consumption estimates. Part of the purpose of the spin release process is to make sure we adequately match our space constraints for spins to the* commitment we make for* spins over the duration of each release.



The type of configuration used by the tools currently used by Release

Engineering do not accept the kind of configuration a Re-Spin might

need. Nor, judging from the comments on a proposal a long time ago, does

upstream for those tools accept the type of configuration it might take

to compose a Re-Spin with, given that -supposedly- it would not be

reproducible.



In the scope of the proposal, for community images that can be hosted
elsewhere, the community managed Kickstart Pool has no explicit requirements on syncing with the Fedora release process as controlled by RelEng.** The Spin SIG is deliberately stood up as a community peer group for community spin concepts, even for items that will not pass RelEng technical review.* Once there is a credible community Spin SIG and they create an initial best practices guidance.. we can start have a serious discussion about how that group can work together to produce images.*


Once we are able to provide shell access to a Fedora Infrastructure controlled compose host for composing signed images, the Spin SIG as a group will need to decide how they want to make use of that infrastructure to compose images with appropriate signatures.** The resulting spins will have to be hosted elsewhere in the community, but will be linkable from spins.fp.org webspace controlled by the Spin SIG.* And yes, people are working towards making this sort of compose host access available, but its not going to happen tomorrow.



-jef

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 03-31-2008, 08:30 PM
Jeroen van Meeuwen
 
Default Spins proposals

Jeff Spaleta wrote:
Once there is a credible community Spin SIG
and they create an initial best practices guidance.. we can start have a
serious discussion about how that group can work together to produce
images.



Perfect, this is exactly what Fedora Unity has been doing for ages; I'm in!

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SpinSIG

Kind regards,

Jeroen van Meeuwen
-kanarip

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 03-31-2008, 09:32 PM
Josh Boyer
 
Default Spins proposals

On Mon, 2008-03-31 at 12:07 -0800, Jeff Spaleta wrote:

> Once we are able to provide shell access to a Fedora Infrastructure
> controlled compose host for composing signed images, the Spin SIG as a
> group will need to decide how they want to make use of that
> infrastructure to compose images with appropriate signatures. The
> resulting spins will have to be hosted elsewhere in the community, but
> will be linkable from spins.fp.org webspace controlled by the Spin
> SIG. And yes, people are working towards making this sort of compose
> host access available, but its not going to happen tomorrow.

Actually, this part could happen tomorrow to a degree. Infrastructure
already provided two Xen guests to do composes on. There are some of us
that have access to them. I used them to spin the XFCE spin.

The hard part would be segregating it to allow spin owners to do the
compose. Though if we can get the other details hammered out, I'm
willing to be a button pusher until that happens.

josh


_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 03-31-2008, 10:02 PM
"Jeff Spaleta"
 
Default Spins proposals

On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 1:32 PM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@gmail.com> wrote:

Actually, this part could happen tomorrow to a degree. *Infrastructure

already provided two Xen guests to do composes on. *There are some of us

that have access to them. *I used them to spin the XFCE spin.


Regardless of whether infrastructure can flip the switch on the hosting instance. Useful access is* NOT going to happen tomorrow....because access to this hinges on there being best practices guidance being developed by a peer group.* Let me be very clear. I plan to make sure the Board blocks on any more trademark approvals until there is a 'credible' Spin SIG in place with at least a draft of technical best practices inside our project umbrella.


This proposal is a general framework for which the 'new' community peer group to live in relation to existing Fedora structures.* This proposal is not the end of the discussion.* Once we make room for the Spin SIG, it must self-organize and it must make a credible attempt to setup a transparent community driven technical review process that the Board can rely on.* I'm not going to willingly hand over keys to community compose hosts to anyone before that happens.* I don't care if members of RelEng volunteer to act as the button pushers or not.


-jef

*



_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 03-31-2008, 10:36 PM
Mike McGrath
 
Default Spins proposals

On Mon, 31 Mar 2008, Josh Boyer wrote:

> On Mon, 2008-03-31 at 12:07 -0800, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
>
> > Once we are able to provide shell access to a Fedora Infrastructure
> > controlled compose host for composing signed images, the Spin SIG as a
> > group will need to decide how they want to make use of that
> > infrastructure to compose images with appropriate signatures. The
> > resulting spins will have to be hosted elsewhere in the community, but
> > will be linkable from spins.fp.org webspace controlled by the Spin
> > SIG. And yes, people are working towards making this sort of compose
> > host access available, but its not going to happen tomorrow.
>
> Actually, this part could happen tomorrow to a degree. Infrastructure
> already provided two Xen guests to do composes on. There are some of us
> that have access to them. I used them to spin the XFCE spin.
>

/me notes we're not happy about it either[1]. Especially since no one has
attempted to get a permanent solution working together yet. Yes, Mock +
selinux blows. Someone needs to fix it though. What ever happened to wevisor?

-Mike


[1] Totally not directed at Josh. But Infrastructure created a bandaid in
the interest of getting spins out the door and I feeling that people think
that its a solution.... its not.

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 11:49 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org