cloud September 2016

cloud@lists.stg.fedoraproject.org

25 participants
97 discussions

Announcing Fedora Atomic "latest" download URLs
by Adam Miller 23 Dec '16

23 Dec '16

Hello all, On behalf of the Fedora Cloud Working Group, I am happy to announce that we now have a persistent point of download for users who would like to simply reference a single URL for scripting purposes or otherwise. There is also a companion set of URLs that provide the image name that can be downloaded for informational purposes or scripting. This will allow users to download the image and know the resulting image name without any human interaction needed. The rationale behind this was to make sure that users always be aware of the version (compose id) of the image they downloaded in order to not have issues/bugs filed against an image named "latest" that is changing out from under users every two weeks. The new URLs are below: https://getfedora.org/atomic_qcow2_latest https://getfedora.org/atomic_raw_latest https://getfedora.org/atomic_vagrant_libvirt_latest https://getfedora.org/atomic_vagrant_virtualbox_latest https://getfedora.org/atomic_qcow2_latest_filename https://getfedora.org/atomic_raw_latest_filename https://getfedora.org/atomic_vagrant_libvirt_latest_filename https://getfedora.org/atomic_vagrant_virtualbox_latest_filename I have also updated the Cloud Wiki[0] page to include information about these as well as a sample script of how to use them together. Thank you, -AdamM [0] - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Cloud#Fedora_Cloud_Atomic_Image_Download_Lin…

5 7

Separate Repository for Atomic Specific Fedora-Dockerfiles
by Trishna Guha 16 Nov '16

16 Nov '16

Hi, We have a repository on Github named Fedora-Dockerfiles [0]. The Repository contains Dockerfiles but those are not **atomic** specific. So adding ability to use **atomic** command will make **other hosts** lose the ability to use the Dockerfiles. Since we are focusing on having production ready Dockerfiles for Atomic host, Should we create a separate repository that contains Atomic specific Dockerfiles? [0] https://github.com/fedora-cloud/Fedora-Dockerfiles -- Regards, Trishna Guha

4 6

Fedora Release Tools Demo (Canceled) - Written Status
by Amanda Carter 07 Nov '16

07 Nov '16

Hi folks, due to travel and various obstacles, we're not able to host a recorded demo this month. Instead we've put together a status report that includes some additional highlights we think you might be interested in. If you have feedback and/or think this works well, I'd love to know b/c I think this vehicle covers more information than a demo alone so I might do both in the future if it's worth it. Apologies for missing the actual show and tell - if there's anything you'd like to see specifically, I'm sure we can arrange something. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ReleaseEngineering/StatusReport#13SEP2016 -- Amanda Carter

1 2

Docker Layered Image Naming and Tagging
by Adam Miller 02 Nov '16

02 Nov '16

Hello all, I was recently discussing some items around docker layered image release process in the future with Randy (bowlofeggs) and Patrick (puiterwijk). As a side effect of our discussion there were two questions I wanted to ask of the Cloud WG: 1) Do we want to maintain docker images for every Fedora Release or do we want to focus only on latest? (i.e. - do we want to maintain them like we do rpms or take a different position) 2) Do we want to keep around multiple versions of a container? For example: If we had the following images: registry.fedoraproject.org/cockpit:0.95-1.23 registry.fedoraproject.org/cockpit:0.95-1.24 registry.fedoraproject.org/cockpit:0.95-1.25 One we release to stable 0.95-1.25, can we delete -1.24 and/or -1.23? What kind of retention do we want here? (Note that rpm content does not currently maintain a N and N-1 in the repositories) Thank you, -AdamM

4 14

[cloud] #153: design, deploy and document Fedora OpenShift Playground (FOSP)
by Fedora Cloud Trac Tickets 13 Oct '16

13 Oct '16

#153: design, deploy and document Fedora OpenShift Playground (FOSP) --------------------+--------------------- Reporter: goern | Owner: Type: task | Status: new Priority: normal | Milestone: Future Component: --- | Keywords: meeting --------------------+--------------------- This ticket is to coordinate the activities to design, deploy and document the Fedora OpenShift Playground (FOSP). Technical work is conducted by puiterwijk and misc, help is offered by scollier and goern jzb to create a wiki page describing the SLA of FOSP -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/cloud/ticket/153> cloud <https://fedorahosted.org/cloud> Fedora Cloud Working Group Ticketing System

1 19

[cloud] #104: Atomic PXE tree does not work for interactive installs
by Fedora Cloud Trac Tickets 13 Oct '16

13 Oct '16

#104: Atomic PXE tree does not work for interactive installs ---------------------+-------------------- Reporter: walters | Owner: Type: task | Status: new Priority: normal | Milestone: Future Component: --- | Keywords: ---------------------+-------------------- Due to the change to *not* embed the content in squashfs (so that you can use kickstart to download newer trees via HTTP), the simple: virt-install --name f22-atomic-test --ram 2048 --disk size=8 -l https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/22_TC2/Cloud_Atomic/x86_64/os/ breaks unless you use e.g. initrd-inject to add a kickstart. This is hard to fix without actually having a Software UI in anaconda for rpmostreepayload. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/cloud/ticket/104> cloud <https://fedorahosted.org/cloud> Fedora Cloud Working Group Ticketing System

1 3

[cloud] #103: bugzilla components for base image and Atomic Host
by Fedora Cloud Trac Tickets 13 Oct '16

13 Oct '16

#103: bugzilla components for base image and Atomic Host ---------------------+-------------------- Reporter: walters | Owner: Type: task | Status: new Priority: normal | Milestone: Future Component: --- | Keywords: ---------------------+-------------------- https://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/spin- kickstarts.git/commit/?id=6ba647a663f09da4ba740eb99733a39cba58d204 shows that we really need a Bugzilla entries in Fedora for both the Docker base image and the Atomic Host. And to define the maintainers of them. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/cloud/ticket/103> cloud <https://fedorahosted.org/cloud> Fedora Cloud Working Group Ticketing System

1 2

[cloud] #89: Add Dockerfile Section to Downloads Page?
by Fedora Cloud Trac Tickets 13 Oct '16

13 Oct '16

#89: Add Dockerfile Section to Downloads Page? --------------------+-------------------- Reporter: jzb | Owner: Type: task | Status: new Priority: normal | Milestone: Future Component: --- | Keywords: --------------------+-------------------- For discussion - should we add a Dockerfile section on the downloads site? -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/cloud/ticket/89> cloud <https://fedorahosted.org/cloud> Fedora Cloud Working Group Ticketing System

1 2

[cloud] #83: participation in OpenShift Commons
by Fedora Cloud Trac Tickets 13 Oct '16

13 Oct '16

#83: participation in OpenShift Commons --------------------+--------------------- Reporter: mattdm | Owner: Type: task | Status: new Priority: normal | Milestone: Future Component: --- | Keywords: meeting --------------------+--------------------- Take a look at http://origin.openshift.com/commons I brought up joining this to the board, and got the reasonable response of "have you gotten the Cloud SIG committed to actually doing the participation asked for?" I've talked to a couple of people and I think there's sufficient interest, but it seemed reasonable to ask formally if this is something we're interested in. The actual formal requirements seem to be low: > OpenShift Commons is open to anyone. We have no Contributor License Agreement (CLA) or required donation to join. Instead we take each organization at their word to be active participants in forums, Special Interest Groups (SIGs), mailing lists and events. and I think it'd be _great_ to have Fedora officially involved in that way. What do you all think? -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/cloud/ticket/83> cloud <https://fedorahosted.org/cloud> Fedora Cloud Working Group Ticketing System

1 4

[cloud] #78: Draft charter change, new slate (Cloud WG members vote needed!)
by Fedora Cloud Trac Tickets 13 Oct '16

13 Oct '16

#78: Draft charter change, new slate (Cloud WG members vote needed!) --------------------+-------------------- Reporter: mattdm | Owner: Type: task | Status: new Priority: normal | Milestone: Future Component: --- | Keywords: --------------------+-------------------- Joe has prepared a draft change to the charter https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/cloud/2014-October/004372.html making it easier to select new members. Additionally, I've proposed a new WG membership slate based on current activity: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/cloud/2014-October/004372.html By the existing rules, both of these need 5 +1 votes from existing members of the WG to pass. That is, the people listed https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Cloud/Governance&oldid=368062#C… — so, current members, please vote on each. If we can't reach quorum in a week, I'll take this to FESCo for "override approval", but I hope that won't be necessary. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/cloud/ticket/78> cloud <https://fedorahosted.org/cloud> Fedora Cloud Working Group Ticketing System

1 7

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

cloud September 2016