Fedora 9 - A release preview
 

So what do we want to see by the Fedora 9 release? Here's a list I'd
like to see:


1) Remove all of our FC6 boxes (either by upgrade or move to RHEL)

2) Separate Test infrastructure - Right now we have people using test
boxes that connect to production databases and information. This needs
to stop. (I understand luke and dgilmore have had some discussions about
this already)


3) Finalized backup solution and koji share (we are out of room for both
backups and koji)


4) Further hardening of our systems. Implementing puppet has done a lot
of good but there's more that needs to be done. This includes making
sure all boxes come up as expected on reboot. Ensuring we have some
sort of management system in place for our xen guests that can run on
multiple hosts.


5) Further system replication - Anything related to distribution or the
primary website (including docs, and mirrors) should be able to run
while PHX is down. Its already pretty close to that.


6) New torrent server

7) New collaboration servers

8) Move hosted out of PHX and on to new server beach systems. This will
likely include creating a new "hosted" group.


9) FAS2 - This will be a big project and is one I'm hoping to accomplish
prior to F9 test1. Ricky has done some great work with it, we'll see
what it takes to finish it off.


10) Better systems integration - Many of our systems now support
different rss feeds and such. We can more easily integrate these
systems together with groups, koji, pkgdb, FAS2, bodhi, you name it.


11) Fewer new systems - This goes along with all the stuff we did to get
F7 and F8 ready. For F9 I'd like to see the team take a bit more time
taking each project to focus on that last 10%. Its always harder then
it seems and with the FAS switchover I feel its important.



:: whew ::

I'd like to spend time at next week's meeting (I'll likely not be at
this weeks meeting) talking about what is important for the individuals
in the rest of the team to get done. After that meeting we'll have a F9
milestone in place and populated with tickets.


What else do you guys want to do in the next 6 months?

Whats important to you not only as a Fedora Infrastructure member, but
as a contributor?


-Mike

_______________________________________________
Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list
Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list

Fedora 9 - A release preview
 

On Wed, 2007-11-21 at 15:03 -0600, Mike McGrath wrote:
> 8) Move hosted out of PHX and on to new server beach systems. This will
> likely include creating a new "hosted" group.

Somewhat related is that it'd be good to build up new machines per-SCM
as opposed to the current fun with chroots on cvs.fedoraproject.org. I
should get back to the work I started for replacing
git.fedoraproject.org as a first one to tackle

Jeremy

_______________________________________________
Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list
Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list

Fedora 9 - A release preview
 

Jeremy Katz wrote:

On Wed, 2007-11-21 at 15:03 -0600, Mike McGrath wrote:

8) Move hosted out of PHX and on to new server beach systems. This will
likely include creating a new "hosted" group.



Somewhat related is that it'd be good to build up new machines per-SCM
as opposed to the current fun with chroots on cvs.fedoraproject.org. I
should get back to the work I started for replacing
git.fedoraproject.org as a first one to tackle



That's something worth talking about. As it is we run hg, mercurial and
git in the same chroot (we're not looking to go with another chroot) but
I think we could just run it on the machine, there's a script + ssh_key
setup in those chroots for security. I think they'd be just as
affective out of a chroot on the hosted boxes. I also wouldn't mind
moving the locations from:


git://git.fedoraproject.org/git/hosted/fedora-infrastructure.git/
to
git://git.fedoraproject.org/fedora-infrastructure.git/


_______________________________________________
Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list
Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list

Fedora 9 - A release preview
 

On Wednesday 21 November 2007, Mike McGrath wrote:

> 9) FAS2 - This will be a big project and is one I'm hoping to accomplish
> prior to F9 test1. Ricky has done some great work with it, we'll see
> what it takes to finish it off.

this will be good to see it finalised

> 10) Better systems integration - Many of our systems now support
> different rss feeds and such. We can more easily integrate these
> systems together with groups, koji, pkgdb, FAS2, bodhi, you name it.

use ssl auth as an option across all web based apps.


> 11) Fewer new systems - This goes along with all the stuff we did to get
> F7 and F8 ready. For F9 I'd like to see the team take a bit more time
> taking each project to focus on that last 10%. Its always harder then
> it seems and with the FAS switchover I feel its important.
>
> :: whew ::
>
> I'd like to spend time at next week's meeting (I'll likely not be at
> this weeks meeting) talking about what is important for the individuals
> in the rest of the team to get done. After that meeting we'll have a F9
> milestone in place and populated with tickets.
>
> What else do you guys want to do in the next 6 months?

better integration with downstream from us projects. like OLPC not sure
exactly how and what yet.


get a concrete plan in place to evaluate the use of cvs for package
maintenance. and evaluate if we move to something else at all, with a plan
to have it implemented for F10 if the decision is to move away from cvs

> Whats important to you not only as a Fedora Infrastructure member, but
> as a contributor?



_______________________________________________
Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list
Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list

Fedora 9 - A release preview
 

On Wed, 2007-11-21 at 15:35 -0600, Mike McGrath wrote:
> Jeremy Katz wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-11-21 at 15:03 -0600, Mike McGrath wrote:
> >> 8) Move hosted out of PHX and on to new server beach systems. This will
> >> likely include creating a new "hosted" group.
> >
> > Somewhat related is that it'd be good to build up new machines per-SCM
> > as opposed to the current fun with chroots on cvs.fedoraproject.org. I
> > should get back to the work I started for replacing
> > git.fedoraproject.org as a first one to tackle
>
> That's something worth talking about. As it is we run hg, mercurial and
> git in the same chroot (we're not looking to go with another chroot) but
> I think we could just run it on the machine, there's a script + ssh_key
> setup in those chroots for security.

They could all share the same machine, it just makes the apache config
more painful. Running them on separate machines[1] also gives us nice
isolation and lets us upgrade each on its own as makes sense for it. It
would also make it so that we could do things like enabling the
cvspserver frontend to git. I'm not really sold much one way or the
other, though.

I don't think that we want to run it on the same machine as the hosted
frontend, though.

> I think they'd be just as
> affective out of a chroot on the hosted boxes. I also wouldn't mind
> moving the locations from:
>
> git://git.fedoraproject.org/git/hosted/fedora-infrastructure.git/
> to
> git://git.fedoraproject.org/fedora-infrastructure.git/

You should be able to at least do 'git clone
git://git.fedoraproject.org/hosted/fedora-infrastructure.git' now. But
if you're pulling over ssh, the additional /git is necessary due to the
fact that you're ssh'ing and looking at the paths on the filesystem

Jeremy

[1] Separate virtual machines

_______________________________________________
Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list
Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list

Fedora 9 - A release preview
 

> You should be able to at least do 'git clone
> git://git.fedoraproject.org/hosted/fedora-infrastructure.git' now. But
> if you're pulling over ssh, the additional /git is necessary due to the
> fact that you're ssh'ing and looking at the paths on the filesystem


Why not add an additional symlink from the root dir to make the
path consistent?

regards,

Florian La Roche

_______________________________________________
Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list
Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list

Fedora 9 - A release preview
 

Florian La Roche wrote:

You should be able to at least do 'git clone
git://git.fedoraproject.org/hosted/fedora-infrastructure.git' now. But
if you're pulling over ssh, the additional /git is necessary due to the
fact that you're ssh'ing and looking at the paths on the filesystem



Why not add an additional symlink from the root dir to make the
path consistent?

Could be done with separate machines but can't be done now due to all
the hosted repositories being on the same machine.


ie, we have:
/git/hosted
/bzr/hosted
/hg/hosted
/svn/hosted

Which of these should a /hosted symlink point to?

-Toshio

_______________________________________________
Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list
Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list

Fedora 9 - A release preview
 

Toshio Kuratomi wrote:

Florian La Roche wrote:

You should be able to at least do 'git clone
git://git.fedoraproject.org/hosted/fedora-infrastructure.git' now. But
if you're pulling over ssh, the additional /git is necessary due to the
fact that you're ssh'ing and looking at the paths on the filesystem



Why not add an additional symlink from the root dir to make the
path consistent?

Could be done with separate machines but can't be done now due to all
the hosted repositories being on the same machine.


ie, we have:
/git/hosted
/bzr/hosted
/hg/hosted
/svn/hosted

Which of these should a /hosted symlink point to?


I think he's talking about fedora-infrastructure.git ->
/git/hosted/fedora-infrastructure


This does raise a good point though, surely there's a git approved way
of dealing with this.


-Mike

_______________________________________________
Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list
Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list

Fedora 9 - A release preview
 

Mike McGrath wrote:
So what do we want to see by the Fedora 9 release? Here's a list I'd
like to see:


1) Remove all of our FC6 boxes (either by upgrade or move to RHEL)

For the TurboGears apps, this should be pretty easy to do (FC6 and RHEL5
are very close).


2) Separate Test infrastructure - Right now we have people using test
boxes that connect to production databases and information. This needs
to stop. (I understand luke and dgilmore have had some discussions about
this already)


We're going to need to get FAS2 up and running and expose information
either directly via LDAP or via JSON-RPC for this to work. That's
definitely a good thing; I just want to mention that we have to get that
working first.


8) Move hosted out of PHX and on to new server beach systems. This will
likely include creating a new "hosted" group.


Are we going to consider anything in the git/bzr/hg/svn repositories to
be hosted for this purpose? A few things in there pre-date tthe
existence of hosted.


9) FAS2 - This will be a big project and is one I'm hoping to accomplish
prior to F9 test1. Ricky has done some great work with it, we'll see
what it takes to finish it off.


Thanks Ricky! This is an important piece as there's potentially a lot
of porting that needs to be done once it is finished.


-Toshio

_______________________________________________
Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list
Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list

Fedora 9 - A release preview
 

Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
8) Move hosted out of PHX and on to new server beach systems. This
will likely include creating a new "hosted" group.


Are we going to consider anything in the git/bzr/hg/svn repositories
to be hosted for this purpose? A few things in there pre-date tthe
existence of hosted.



Not sure, I'd like to build a clearly defined list of what we provide as
part of "hosted". We can grandfather in whats there I suppose if we
can't come to an agreement. What projects specifically are you
wondering about?


-Mike

_______________________________________________
Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list
Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list