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 Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 06-14-2011, 11:44 PM
Kevin Fenzi
 
Default Plan for tomorrow's FESCo meeting (2011-06-15)

Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FESCo
meeting tomorrow at 17:30UTC (1:30pm EDT) in #fedora-meeting on
irc.freenode.net.

Links to all tickets below can be found at:
https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/report/9

= Followups =

#topic #563 suggested policy: all daemons must set RELRO and PIE flags
.fesco 563

#topic #599 F16Feature: ConsoleKit Removal/Automatic Multi-Seat Support - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/ckremoval
.fesco 599

= New business =

#topic Welcome to new members, thanks to departing members

#topic Elect Chair

#topic Change meeting time/day?

= Fedora Engineering Services tickets =

https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-engineering-services/report/6

= Open Floor =

For more complete details, please visit each individual ticket. The
report of the agenda items can be found at
https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/report/9

If you would like to add something to this agenda, you can reply to
this e-mail, file a new ticket at https://fedorahosted.org/fesco,
e-mail me directly, or bring it up at the end of the meeting, during
the open floor topic. Note that added topics may be deferred until
the following meeting.

kevin
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 06-15-2011, 06:25 PM
Kevin Fenzi
 
Default Plan for tomorrow's FESCo meeting (2011-06-15)

===================================
#fedora-meeting: FESCO (2011-06-15)
===================================

Meeting started by nirik at 17:30:02 UTC. The full logs are available at
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2011-06-15/fesco.2011-06-15-17.30.log.html

Meeting summary
---------------
* init process (nirik, 17:30:03)

* Welcome to new members, thanks to departing members (nirik, 17:32:51)

* Elect Chair (nirik, 17:34:40)
* notting to deal with sponsor / pp requests for now (nirik,
17:39:15)
* ACTION: nirik to write up wiki page on running meetings (nirik,
17:45:19)
* ACTION: ajax to use that to run meeting next week. (nirik,
17:45:38)
* ACTION: notting to update wiki pages. (nirik, 17:45:57)

* Change meeting time/day? (nirik, 17:47:06)
* ACTION: mjg59 to file ticket on new meeting time, add whenisgood
link and we will revisit next week about changing the time/day of
meeting. (nirik, 17:50:47)

* #563 suggested policy: all daemons must set RELRO and PIE flags
(nirik, 17:51:39)
* AGREED: enable partial relro in rawhide by default, ping FPC to see
about adding a guideline to use PIE for long running or security
relevant applications? (nirik, 18:00:41)

* #599 F16Feature: ConsoleKit Removal/Automatic Multi-Seat Support -
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/ckremoval (nirik, 18:01:50)
* AGREED: feature is approved. (nirik, 18:04:35)

* Open Floor (nirik, 18:07:26)
* ACTION: sgallagh will collect base / core packages that need
conversion to systemd and we will try and get those done by alpha.
(nirik, 18:20:43)

Meeting ended at 18:24:26 UTC.




Action Items
------------
* nirik to write up wiki page on running meetings
* ajax to use that to run meeting next week.
* notting to update wiki pages.
* mjg59 to file ticket on new meeting time, add whenisgood link and we
will revisit next week about changing the time/day of meeting.
* sgallagh will collect base / core packages that need conversion to
systemd and we will try and get those done by alpha.




Action Items, by person
-----------------------
* ajax
* ajax to use that to run meeting next week.
* mjg59
* mjg59 to file ticket on new meeting time, add whenisgood link and we
will revisit next week about changing the time/day of meeting.
* nirik
* nirik to write up wiki page on running meetings
* notting
* notting to update wiki pages.
* sgallagh
* sgallagh will collect base / core packages that need conversion to
systemd and we will try and get those done by alpha.
* **UNASSIGNED**
* (none)




People Present (lines said)
---------------------------
* nirik (80)
* pjones (34)
* sgallagh (27)
* t8m (23)
* ajax (19)
* notting (17)
* mjg59 (16)
* mmaslano (15)
* cwickert (13)
* kylem (10)
* gholms (7)
* zodbot (6)
* drago01 (1)
--
17:30:02 <nirik> #startmeeting FESCO (2011-06-15)
17:30:02 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed Jun 15 17:30:02 2011 UTC. The chair is nirik. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:30:02 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
17:30:02 <nirik> #meetingname fesco
17:30:02 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fesco'
17:30:03 <nirik> #chair notting nirik ajax cwickert mjg59 mmaslano t8m pjones sgallagh
17:30:03 <zodbot> Current chairs: ajax cwickert mjg59 mmaslano nirik notting pjones sgallagh t8m
17:30:03 <nirik> #topic init process
17:30:35 <mjg59> Afternoon
17:30:40 <pjones> yo
17:30:41 <nirik> hello folks.
17:30:43 * gholms waves to all the new members
17:30:44 <pjones> ha ha suckers
17:30:46 <pjones> oh, wait.
17:30:49 <gholms> (and all the veterans)
17:31:02 <ajax> rocking chair, shotgun...
17:31:02 <sgallagh> Hello
17:31:03 <pjones> gholms: don't forget the veteran new members.
17:31:14 <gholms> pjones: They got *two* waves.
17:31:25 <pjones> is three too much to ask?
17:31:35 <gholms> pjones: Gotta make them last.
17:31:36 <pjones> I say the waving has gone not too far enough.
17:31:39 * notting is here
17:31:50 <mmaslano> hello
17:31:53 <mmaslano> hi t8m
17:31:55 <t8m> hello
17:32:11 <nirik> hello t8m
17:32:40 <nirik> ok, lets go ahead and dive in then...
17:32:51 <nirik> #topic Welcome to new members, thanks to departing members
17:33:12 <nirik> Welcome to newly elected folks: pjones, sgallagh, t8m.
17:33:41 <sgallagh> Good to be here
17:33:44 <gholms> Crap, I waved too soon.
17:33:50 * gholms waves anyway
17:33:55 <nirik> Thanks to departing folks: kylem, SMParrish, mclasen
17:34:05 * kylem waves.
17:34:17 <t8m> Hello again
17:34:40 <nirik> #topic Elect Chair
17:34:55 <nirik> So, I've been doing chair stuff for a while... my time has become less of late.
17:35:11 <notting> i wonder how that happened.
17:35:12 <nirik> I wouldn't mind handing it off or having us switch to some kind of rotating duty on it.
17:35:20 <nirik> yeah, odd.
17:35:36 <nirik> or we could delegate parts of it out more...
17:35:51 <mjg59> Rotation seems like a plan
17:35:52 <ajax> i don't mind rotating in, but i don't think i could take it on full time.
17:36:01 <mjg59> Yeah, ditto
17:36:46 <sgallagh> For the new kids: what are the chair's duties, besides running the meetings?
17:37:29 <nirik> sending out agenda a day or so before. Keeping track of sponsor/provenpackager requests (sending for feedback, dealing with after a week).
17:37:34 <nirik> running the meeting.
17:37:41 <nirik> sending out minutes to the list after
17:38:05 <mmaslano> nirik: do we have manual to creating minutes from irc etc?
17:38:20 <nirik> I could write up a wiki page on it...
17:38:35 <nirik> mmaslano: meetbot does that. I just copy/paste to an email and reply to the agenda email.
17:38:37 <notting> handling sponsor/pp requests seems like sometihng that would be simpler to delegate than rotate. i'll do that
17:38:52 <nirik> notting: cool.
17:39:15 <nirik> #info notting to deal with sponsor / pp requests for now
17:39:50 * t8m would prefer keeping elected chair if someone steps up and agrees to be one
17:40:59 <ajax> everyone takes one step back...
17:41:07 <t8m>
17:41:09 <nirik> well, if people really want I suppose I could keep doing it... just takes time.
17:41:16 <mjg59> t8m: Well, if you're volunteering...
17:41:30 * t8m is not
17:41:36 <mjg59> Heh
17:41:43 <mmaslano> I agree with rotation
17:41:54 <nirik> so, how about this: I will try and write up a wiki page with tasks/workflow.
17:42:04 <pjones> sounds like a good start.
17:42:06 <nirik> someone else can try and use that next week to run things and we can adjust from there?
17:42:12 <sgallagh> +1
17:42:14 <t8m> +1
17:42:17 <mmaslano> 1
17:42:24 <mjg59> +1
17:42:31 <nirik> who would want to be the beta-tester for next week?
17:43:01 <ajax> yeah, why not.
17:43:03 <sgallagh> If no one else wants to volunteer, I'll take that on
17:43:26 <nirik> oh, also needing doing: update FESCo wiki page with current members, update previous members pages, and update fesco list (I can do that last one)
17:44:02 * cwickert rushes in late
17:44:30 <notting> i'll update the wiki
17:45:03 <nirik> sgallagh / ajax: which of you would like next week?
17:45:19 <nirik> #action nirik to write up wiki page on running meetings
17:45:24 <ajax> nirik: i'll do it
17:45:35 <sgallagh> take it
17:45:38 <nirik> #action ajax to use that to run meeting next week.
17:45:57 <nirik> #action notting to update wiki pages.
17:46:03 <nirik> ok, anything else on chair stuff?
17:46:16 <notting> meeting time is a separate item?
17:46:59 <nirik> yeah
17:47:01 <nirik> next up
17:47:06 <nirik> #topic Change meeting time/day?
17:47:18 <nirik> so, does this time work for everyone? or should we try a whenisgood thing again?
17:47:20 <mjg59> Well, everyone's here now
17:47:26 <sgallagh> This time works fine for me
17:47:28 <cwickert> can we have the meeting a little later?
17:47:33 <mjg59> So it clearly works to some extent
17:47:38 <mmaslano> I'd like to change the day of meeting
17:47:39 <pjones> this time works for me as well.
17:47:39 <mjg59> But probably best to do another whenisgood
17:47:48 <mjg59> I'll set one up after the meeting
17:47:55 <mmaslano> thanks
17:47:56 <t8m> +1 to do another whenisgood
17:48:07 <sgallagh> Sure
17:48:13 <pjones> whatevs.
17:48:18 <notting> so, we're split between us eastern, us mountan, and CET?
17:48:29 <ajax> presumably whatever we decide on won't take effect until after next week.
17:48:30 <pjones> notting: and somebody from CET wants it later
17:48:58 <pjones> ajax: presumably we use whenisgood as a recommendation and move it by vote.
17:49:02 <nirik> mjg59: thanks. Perhaps make a ticket with the whenisgood link, and we can chime in there when we have updated it?
17:49:59 <nirik> yeah, lets meet this same time next week, then change?
17:50:07 <ajax> ack.
17:50:19 <cwickert> ok
17:50:24 <mjg59> nirik: Sure
17:50:31 <sgallagh> +1
17:50:37 <mmaslano> ok
17:50:41 <pjones> yep
17:50:47 <nirik> #action mjg59 to file ticket on new meeting time, add whenisgood link and we will revisit next week about changing the time/day of meeting.
17:51:08 <nirik> ok, anything else on time/day/administravia?
17:51:37 <nirik> ok, moving on.
17:51:39 <nirik> #topic #563 suggested policy: all daemons must set RELRO and PIE flags
17:51:40 <nirik> .fesco 563
17:51:41 <zodbot> nirik: #563 (suggested policy: all daemons must set RELRO and PIE flags) - FESCo - Trac - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/563
17:51:44 <nirik> any news here?
17:52:00 <kylem> last thing before i stepped aside
17:52:05 <mmaslano> in ticket are details from jakub
17:52:07 <pjones> This just seems like another PIE in the sky feature that...
17:52:13 <pjones>
17:52:18 <mmaslano> he had some recommendation
17:52:21 <kylem> i got jakub to post to the ticket, and he supplied a bit more info to me and ajax
17:52:30 <kylem> (but didn't answer whether the bug is a bug.)
17:52:40 <nirik> ah, I didn't see his comment.
17:53:06 <kylem> i'd suggest you follow the original suggestion, enable PIE as necessary, and possibly add some tooling with upstream to ensure that symbols are resolved as intended
17:53:22 <kylem> (enable PIE where security relevant, long running daemons)
17:53:28 <ajax> relro is pretty trivially okay globally
17:53:39 <pjones> yeah
17:53:42 <kylem> yup.
17:53:55 <t8m> does relro without now bring actually any security?
17:54:09 <kylem> perhaps you can ask for a ftbfs-style test of them both
17:54:12 <pjones> t8m: you mean without PIE?
17:54:26 <nirik> proposal: enable relro in rawhide by default, ping FPC to see about adding a guideline to use PIE for long running or security relevant applications?
17:54:43 <sgallagh> pjones: No, there are two variants of RELRO
17:54:46 <t8m> pjones, no Partial relro (-Wl,-z,relro) instead of Full relro (-Wl,-z,relro,-z,now)
17:54:48 <ajax> t8m: yes. imagine an array of function pointers, all bound to symbols provided by the executable. relro lets you mark that const and have it actually work.
17:55:50 <ajax> full relro extends that to cases where the symbol you're taking the address of is provided by one of your libraries instead.
17:55:59 <nirik> wait, is he saying he also objects to relro?
17:56:10 <ajax> nirik: no, he's saying he objects to -z now.
17:56:30 <kylem> nirik, yes, that sounds like something that will keep the toolchain people happy (ie: what they intended) as well
17:56:31 <nirik> ah, so partial he's ok with...
17:56:35 <pjones> also note that systemd isn't on the list in the ticket
17:56:41 <pjones> (because it's newer than the ticket, looks like)
17:56:54 <nirik> pjones: I suspect we need to come up with a critera and ask it to be a packaging guideline...
17:56:59 <t8m> ok then -Wl,-z,relro should be in default flags at least on arches where it makes sense
17:56:59 <pjones> nirik: yes.
17:57:29 <pjones> nirik: does "long running" include, say, gnome-shell?
17:57:38 <ajax> t8m: i don't think there are any arches where it doesn't. pretty sure that's an OSABI not PSABI thing.
17:57:46 <nirik> it could I suppose.
17:58:00 <pjones> I guess we can leave that up to FPC.
17:58:04 <t8m> and for the -Wl,-z,now and PIE we should tell FPC to make a guideline that recommends (requires?) that for long running daemons
17:58:09 <ajax> anyway the answer here is that i still don't have a resolution on the thing that was keeping me from changing the rpm configs.
17:58:28 <nirik> so, we can't enable partial relro anyhow yet?
17:58:36 <t8m> ajax, and that was?
17:58:42 <pjones> t8m: requires; if there's genuine cause for exception, it can be granted.
17:58:44 <kylem> nirik, no, that was -pie that caused it
17:58:47 <ajax> t8m: -fPIE seems to imply -rdynamic.
17:58:55 <pjones> t8m: but we don't expect that to be common, so no reason not to.
17:59:19 <ajax> nirik: i suppose we can, yeah.
17:59:26 <ajax> i'll do that this week
17:59:39 <nirik> ok, so votes on my proposal? or alternates?
17:59:50 <nirik> proposal: enable partial relro in rawhide by default, ping FPC to see about adding a guideline to use PIE for long running or security relevant applications?
18:00:04 <t8m> nirik, +1
18:00:05 <ajax> +1
18:00:09 <mjg59> +1
18:00:10 <sgallagh> +1
18:00:11 <notting> +1
18:00:13 <cwickert> +1
18:00:15 <pjones> +1
18:00:18 <mmaslano> +1
18:00:41 <nirik> #agreed enable partial relro in rawhide by default, ping FPC to see about adding a guideline to use PIE for long running or security relevant applications?
18:00:56 <nirik> anything further on this?
18:00:57 <gholms> Wow, I haven't seen +8 here in a while.
18:01:50 <nirik> #topic #599 F16Feature: ConsoleKit Removal/Automatic Multi-Seat Support - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/ckremoval
18:01:50 <nirik> .fesco 599
18:01:51 <zodbot> nirik: #599 (F16Feature: ConsoleKit Removal/Automatic Multi-Seat Support - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/ckremoval) - FESCo - Trac - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/599
18:02:01 <nirik> we got answers on the talk page...
18:02:46 <pjones> I'm all for removing CK
18:02:53 <notting> given those answers, +1 from me
18:03:02 <cwickert> +1 same here
18:03:07 <ajax> +1
18:03:16 <nirik> +1 here.
18:03:36 <pjones> +1 from me as well.
18:03:43 <t8m> if the other desktops/*dms keep working (regardless of the multiseat support) then +1 from me
18:03:47 <sgallagh> As long as it's true that CK is parallel-installable.
18:03:47 <mjg59> +1
18:03:57 <mmaslano> +1 if destops are ok
18:04:28 <sgallagh> +1, conditional on compatibility with other desktops
18:04:35 <nirik> #agreed feature is approved.
18:04:51 <nirik> we had 2 features that came in this morning...
18:04:58 <nirik> should we do them now? or wait for next week on them?
18:05:16 <ajax> would prefer to wait, i've not had a chance to read them
18:05:30 <mjg59> I think the tboot one, especially, is going to require some examination
18:05:30 <pjones> I would argue for next week, since I haven't had a chance to read them, but I'm also gloriously unprepared for everything else today.
18:05:33 <pjones> (apologies)
18:05:42 <sgallagh> Yeah, let's get them next week, unless they've requested an urgent decision
18:05:44 <pjones> oh, tboot is on there. definitely next week then.
18:06:00 <mjg59> pjones: You've been looking at tboot before - can you stick some questions on the talk page?
18:06:20 <pjones> mjg59: I've really not been looking at it; jreiden and his team have.
18:06:27 <pjones> of course, he'
18:06:31 <pjones> he's sitting 5 feet to my left.
18:06:34 <mjg59> Heh
18:06:38 * nirik is fine with defering them.
18:06:57 <nirik> any objections?
18:07:26 <nirik> #topic Open Floor
18:07:36 <nirik> ok, open floor time. Anyone have any open floor items?
18:07:43 <notting> mmaslano: how goes the perl rebuild?
18:08:12 <mmaslano> notting: I and my co-worker are working on automatical rebuild script.
18:08:35 <mmaslano> but I play in mu buildroot, so nothing should broke
18:09:34 * mmaslano is running out of battery
18:09:42 <sgallagh> There's been a lot of chatter on fedora-devel lately about systemd.
18:09:53 <nirik> sgallagh: yeah.
18:10:11 <sgallagh> I was thinking it might be prudent to discuss some milestones for the SYSV->systemd conversions
18:10:17 <drago01> sgallagh: s/lot of chatter/flamewar/
18:11:10 <nirik> sgallagh: ok. we do have a feature on it...
18:11:36 <notting> sgallagh: in the form of 'for any given package, do it by beta, or don't do it'? or some different sorts of milestones?
18:12:12 <t8m> notting, something like that would be nice
18:12:27 <sgallagh> notting: Well, the point of the feature is to be 100% converted by beta
18:12:44 <notting> and you'd prefer to not have 100% land directly at beta?
18:12:49 <sgallagh> I'm proposing that we should try to accomplish 100% of "base" by alpha
18:12:51 <notting> <thud>
18:13:05 <t8m> Is it realistic?
18:13:18 <sgallagh> Is it any less realistic than beta?
18:13:34 <nirik> having areas to concentrate on seems like a good idea.
18:13:41 <nirik> how many are there in base?
18:14:15 <notting> t8m: depends a bit on the implementation - if it's "wait until the service file is in upstream version", it will take longer
18:14:45 <sgallagh> notting: I don't think that's likely achievable by RC, let alone beta or alpha.
18:14:55 <t8m> notting, it might take forever for some upstreams
18:14:58 <sgallagh> Fedora is going to have to carry some private copies for a while (possibly several releases)
18:15:41 * cwickert is sorry but has to leave now.
18:15:43 * nirik nods.
18:16:00 <nirik> I think asking the folks working on that feature to concentrate on base seems fine...
18:16:01 <cwickert> before I leave: if you decide anything, I am +1 for converting everything to systemd asap
18:16:21 <notting> sgallagh: so, first step would be to audit services to get the base & core list. anyone want to take that as an action item? (if it's not on the feature page already)
18:16:27 <pjones> yeah, I don't have a problem telling them to prioritize stuff in base
18:16:58 <t8m> cwickert, I do not agree with that.
18:17:24 <sgallagh> notting: I'll take an action item to get the base and core list. (Should be easy with a little mock-fu)
18:18:00 <sgallagh> I propose that once we have this list, we open a bug on each as-yet unconverted daemon in Bugzilla, blocking the alpha
18:18:20 <t8m> sgallagh, from the base and core lists I suppose?
18:18:26 <sgallagh> Yes
18:18:31 <t8m> OK then
18:19:14 <nirik> sgallagh: there already are bugs on things for converting.
18:19:17 <notting> sgallagh: just make the existing bugs block the alpha, but yes
18:19:20 <nirik> could we just update those to block?
18:19:22 <cwickert> t8m: you don't have to agree with me. it was just in case we vote whether we want to have base or everything converted by alpha, beta or whatever, I want the earliest milestone in this development cycle to give it as much testing as possible. understood?
18:19:39 <sgallagh> nirik: If they already exist, updating them to block is fine
18:19:48 <t8m> cwickert, OK
18:19:49 <nirik> +1 to that plan. seems fine to me.
18:19:58 <cwickert> +1
18:20:03 <pjones> +1
18:20:07 * cwickert is really afk now
18:20:07 <sgallagh> It'd be nice to have a keywork for SystemdConversion or similar in BZ as well, but it's probably too late for that.
18:20:31 <notting> sgallagh: abuse a whiteboard?
18:20:36 * notting is +1 to the plan
18:20:43 <nirik> #action sgallagh will collect base / core packages that need conversion to systemd and we will try and get those done by alpha.
18:20:46 <t8m> sgallagh, no need to add keyword, either abuse whiteboard or add a tracking bug
18:20:47 <cwickert> sgallagh: why is a tracker bug not enough?
18:21:00 <t8m> cwickert, still here?
18:21:06 <cwickert>
18:21:18 <sgallagh> cwickert: A tracker is fine. I should have been less specific: "An easy search filter for BZ"
18:21:29 <nirik> ok, anything else on this? or any other open floor item?
18:21:35 <cwickert> ok then
18:22:57 * nirik will close out the meeting in a minute if nothing else comes up
18:24:22 <nirik> thanks for coming everyone!
18:24:26 <nirik> #endmeeting
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 06-15-2011, 06:58 PM
"Jˇhann B. Gu­mundsson"
 
Default Plan for tomorrow's FESCo meeting (2011-06-15)

On 06/15/2011 06:25 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> * Open Floor (nirik, 18:07:26)
> * ACTION: sgallagh will collect base / core packages that need
> conversion to systemd and we will try and get those done by alpha.
> (nirik, 18:20:43)
>

Can I ask why FESCO decided to ignore the feature owner(s) when making
this decision?

Any other goals/plans the sysvtosystemd features owners should be aware of?

Stephen care to give us a heads up?

JBG
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 06-15-2011, 07:02 PM
Kevin Fenzi
 
Default Plan for tomorrow's FESCo meeting (2011-06-15)

On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 18:58:34 +0000
"Jˇhann B. Gu­mundsson" <johannbg@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 06/15/2011 06:25 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > * Open Floor (nirik, 18:07:26)
> > * ACTION: sgallagh will collect base / core packages that need
> > conversion to systemd and we will try and get those done by
> > alpha. (nirik, 18:20:43)
> >
>
> Can I ask why FESCO decided to ignore the feature owner(s) when
> making this decision?

I don't think anyone intended to ignore the feature owner(s) here.
It just seemed like a good/idea suggestion.

Do you think it's a bad idea? if so, why?

> Any other goals/plans the sysvtosystemd features owners should be
> aware of?

Not that I know of.

> Stephen care to give us a heads up?

I think he was intending to do so when he gathered the list...

kevin
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 06-15-2011, 07:42 PM
Stephen Gallagher
 
Default Plan for tomorrow's FESCo meeting (2011-06-15)

On Wed, 2011-06-15 at 18:58 +0000, "Jˇhann B. Gu­mundsson" wrote:
> On 06/15/2011 06:25 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > * Open Floor (nirik, 18:07:26)
> > * ACTION: sgallagh will collect base / core packages that need
> > conversion to systemd and we will try and get those done by alpha.
> > (nirik, 18:20:43)
> >
>
> Can I ask why FESCO decided to ignore the feature owner(s) when making
> this decision?
>

This decision was made in order to help this feature move along. We
discussed that we would like to see services converting to systemd
throughout the development process, rather than (as is traditional)
having them all drop two days before the beta release (or miss it
entirely and have to be resolved post-beta).

This should help you out a lot, actually. Since you'll get a small
subset of the services out of the way early and not be smothered with
hand-holding just prior to beta. (Especially since those maintainers
that have gone through the conversion for core/base will be able to help
others along as well).

> Any other goals/plans the sysvtosystemd features owners should be aware of?
>
> Stephen care to give us a heads up?


I've created a blocker bug for the sysv->systemd conversion for Alpha
here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/showdependencytree.cgi?id=713562&hide_resolved=1
(That link will show all of the child bugs. There are eleven at the time
of this writing, one already completed in Rawhide)


--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 06-16-2011, 03:05 PM
Stephen Gallagher
 
Default Plan for tomorrow's FESCo meeting (2011-06-15)

On Wed, 2011-06-15 at 21:56 +0000, "Jˇhann B. Gu­mundsson" wrote:
> As I say let's put the goal a bit higher and aim atleast for all those
> service on the livecd
>
> > > Any other goals/plans the sysvtosystemd features owners should be aware of?
> > >
> > > Stephen care to give us a heads up?
> >
> > I've created a blocker bug for the sysv->systemd conversion for Alpha
> > here:
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/showdependencytree.cgi?id=713562&hide_resolved=1
> > (That link will show all of the child bugs. There are eleven at the time
> > of this writing, one already completed in Rawhide
>
> Hum should this contain most if not all the bugs which contain systemd
> unit files from my wiki page
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Johannbg/QA/Systemd/compatability?
>


I spoke with Jˇhann today on IRC and I agree that a more effective
cutoff for the Alpha blockers would be the services shipped on the
various LiveCD distributions. This way, starting with the Alpha, we'll
have a completely systemd distribution available for testing (since
installation from LiveCD is becoming the most common case).

Jˇhann, would you mind targeting the systemd conversion bugs for the
components you noted to the tracking BZ I opened?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 03:13 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ę2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org