env-and-stacks July 2015

env-and-stacks@lists.fedoraproject.org

19 participants
17 discussions

Fedora Developer Portal - UX point of view
by Petr Hracek 15 Sep '15

15 Sep '15

Hi Mairin, sorry for bother you with this item but I would like to ask you If you can thing about how Fedora Developer Portal could look like. I propose that skin or face for developer.fp.org can be used also for another portals which could be defined later on. Or even if they are already exists. I guess that fedoraproject.org should have a common face:) We would like to release a first version of Fedora Developer Portal in the middle of September but many folks could have holidays and I guess that you too.:) We already have a GitHub repo for mockups [1] and feel free to use it. I would like to really thank you for your time and support. [1] https://github.com/developer-portal/mockups Greetings Petr -- Petr Hracek Software Engineer Developer Experience Red Hat, Inc Mob: +420777056169 email: phracek(a)redhat.com

3 6

Meeting minutes for Env-and-Stacks WG meeting (2015-07-30)
by Václav Pavlín 30 Jul '15

30 Jul '15

============================================== #fedora-meeting-2: Env and Stacks (2015-07-30) ============================================== Meeting started by vpavlin at 12:00:10 UTC. The full logs are available at http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-2/2015-07-30/env-and-stacks… . Meeting summary --------------- * init process (vpavlin, 12:02:07) * Fedora Developer Portal (vpavlin, 12:06:19) * LINK: https://developer-phracek.rhcloud.com/ (vpavlin, 12:06:38) * IDEA: order content on the portal from popularity perspective (vpavlin, 12:10:20) * mizmo asked to create a draft of UI (vpavlin, 12:12:08) * LINK: https://github.com/developer-portal/content/issues/33 (vpavlin, 12:12:43) * ACTION: langdon to ask mikeG if he would be able to help with content (vpavlin, 12:15:54) * IDEA: langdon: have a section owner who is the editor.. then they can check the student content (vpavlin, 12:23:54) * open floor (vpavlin, 12:26:56) Meeting ended at 12:28:41 UTC. Action Items ------------ * langdon to ask mikeG if he would be able to help with content Action Items, by person ----------------------- * langdon * langdon to ask mikeG if he would be able to help with content * **UNASSIGNED** * (none) People Present (lines said) --------------------------- * vpavlin (40) * phracek (20) * langdon (15) * bkabrda (13) * phracek_ (9) * ttomecek (6) * zodbot (5) * hhorak (0) * juhp (0) * ncoghlan (0) * jkaluza (0) * walters (0) Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4 .. _`MeetBot`: http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot -- Architect - Senior Software Engineer Developer Experience Brno, Czech Republic Phone: +420 739 666 824

1 0

Issues for next meeting 2015-07-30
by Petr Hracek 29 Jul '15

29 Jul '15

I would like to ask you if we can discuss this topics on meeting: - RHEL.next and how communicate between containers / stacks. - Rings in Fedora 24 - documentation would be awesome Fedora Developer Portal can be an issue on OpenFloor. -- Petr Hracek Software Engineer Developer Experience Red Hat, Inc Mob: +420777056169 email: phracek(a)redhat.com

2 1

Re: Fedora developer portal - proof of concept
by Adam Samalik 29 Jul '15

29 Jul '15

Hi everyone, I updated the prototype and tried apply your feedback: https://developer-phracek.rhcloud.com/ I removed everything "random" from the home page and changed it - so it better explains the purpose of the portal. The previous version was more about previewing the technology and structure in the main menu. The homepage itself wasn't that important - sorry again for not making this clear in advance. We should be now able to use the prototype to: - preview the content from our content repo [1] (it's better than reading markdown) - decide whether this structure is acceptable (and probably change it a lot) - and basically have something running What it's not in the prototype: - section with docker images and vagrant boxes to download - section with blogs and updates What I would like to do next? Ideally, if you find some time, I would like to have a session with you, people interested in this project, to discuss the content, structure and basically everything related to this. For example, I really like how the Fedora Hubs project [2] is going. If we could do something similar, even when the Fedora Developer Portal is not that big, it would be really nice. If you don't know what this is all about, please visit our project wiki [3] or ask me any question. Adam [1] https://github.com/developer-portal/content [2] http://blog.linuxgrrl.com/2015/07/01/fedora-hubs-update/ [3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Websites/Developer ----- Original Message ----- From: "Petr Hracek" <phracek(a)redhat.com> To: devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Sent: Wednesday, 22 July, 2015 3:24:11 PM Subject: Re: Fedora developer portal - proof of concept On 07/21/2015 04:00 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Jonathan Wakely < jwakely(a)redhat.com > wrote: On 21/07/15 15:45 +0200, Petr Hracek wrote: Feel free to send us any comment or improvements. We would like to improve Fedora for developers. Just contents are missing. Under "The latest stable runtimes and frameworks Packaged in Fedora and ready to use!" would it be worth mentioning C and C++? GCC 5 is the first compiler to default to the latest C11 standard, and we ship more of the latest C++ standard library extensions than any other compiler. There's a lot happening in that space, and not everyone gets excited by shiny dynamic languages ;-) -- devel mailing list devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Personally, I'm a little uncomfortable with the phrasing "Fedora is made for developers". It implies that we don't do anything to make it great for non-developers, which is not true at all. Is there a better way we can word this? As I mentioned in the first mail. This is proof of concept and will be definitely changed. UX team could look at it and let us know whether is fullfield with fedoraproject UX layouts. Other pages which could be developed later on could have the same faces so that all pages looks the same. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! -- Petr Hracek Software Engineer Developer Experience Red Hat, Inc Mob: +420777056169 email: phracek(a)redhat.com -- devel mailing list devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

4 7

Meeting minutes for Env-and-Stacks WG meeting (2015-07-16)
by Václav Pavlín 22 Jul '15

22 Jul '15

============================================== #fedora-meeting-2: Env and Stacks (2015-07-16) ============================================== Meeting started by vpavlin at 12:11:50 UTC. The full logs are available at http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-2/2015-07-16/env-and-stacks… . Meeting summary --------------- * init process (vpavlin, 12:12:38) * "Developer oriented overview of available deployment tech" (interim name) (vpavlin, 12:15:32) * a documentation project to describe various deployment technologies (Nulecule, xdg-apps, "something" for software collections) (vpavlin, 12:17:31) * matrix of which technology should be used for what *kind* of (Fedora) app (vpavlin, 12:19:04) * a nice little flowchart of 1) identify app type 2) identify pkg type 3) pkg 4) deploy to copr 4a) publicize 5) how to promote to playground (vpavlin, 12:21:46) * Would be great content for developer.fedoraproject.org (vpavlin, 12:24:07) * LINK: https://github.com/developer-portal/content (phracek, 12:24:34) * developer.fedoraproject.org to have first version up till the end of July (vpavlin, 12:30:06) * first pass could be a simple 2 column table, later maybe something like https://www.drupal.org/start (vpavlin, 12:32:26) * Developer Site for Fedora Project (vpavlin, 12:41:12) * Project started by phracek and jstribny - https://github.com/developer-portal/content (vpavlin, 12:41:42) * Added to Tasklist - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Env_and_Stacks/Tasklist#Tasklist (vpavlin, 12:42:03) * First version to be up till the end of July (vpavlin, 12:42:21) * Should be accessible through developer.fp.org, developers.fp.org, dev.fp.org (vpavlin, 12:42:48) * LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Env_and_Stacks/Projects/DeveloperPortal (vpavlin, 12:43:10) * LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Websites/Developer (phracek, 12:43:43) * mizmo was contacted about Fedora Developer Portal (vpavlin, 12:50:57) * developer.fedoraproject.org to be announced with F23, tied to F24 (vpavlin, 12:59:05) * juhp_ to bring this topic up on Workstation WG meeting (vpavlin, 12:59:42) * we should do a self-contained change for Developer Portal to get a FESCo's sign-off on the idea (vpavlin, 13:00:53) * open floor (vpavlin, 13:01:27) Meeting ended at 13:03:09 UTC. Action Items ------------ Action Items, by person ----------------------- * **UNASSIGNED** * (none) People Present (lines said) --------------------------- * vpavlin (56) * phracek (52) * ncoghlan (44) * langdon (14) * juhp_ (8) * Corey84 (8) * ttomecek (5) * zodbot (5) * langdon_ (2) * langdon__ (1) * bkabrda (0) * hhorak (0) * juhp (0) * jkaluza (0) * walters (0) Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4 .. _`MeetBot`: http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot -- Architect - Senior Software Engineer Developer Experience Brno, Czech Republic Phone: +420 739 666 824

4 5

Fedora developer portal - proof of concept
by Petr Hracek 21 Jul '15

21 Jul '15

Hi Fedora devels and other folks, Adam Samalik and me we create a first proof of concept Fedora Developer Portal. Testing instance is already available here [1]. * **Fedora Developer Portal* is a new place for developers and not only for them, providing information about tools, projects, technologies and other features that are packaged in Fedora. This page would be mainly used for developers building on Fedora and help them with tools. But of course other users can use main technologies developed on Fedora. It is plan to have reference to this portal from [2]. What is possible structure of Fedora Developer Portal is on [3] page under section *'Structure'. *If anyone is interested with helping us to create this portal please clone repository [4] and provide any contents. We will review it together with other colleagues and add it to this Page. UX design is going to be discussed and reviewed by Mairin. Thanks for your help. Some discussion about this portal is on Env&Stack mailing list. What Fedora developer portal should cover at all is here [3] and can be extended of course. GitHub repository for content is [4]. GitHub repository for website is [5]. Feel free to send us any comment or improvements. We would like to improve Fedora for developers. Just contents are missing. [1] https://developer-phracek.rhcloud.com/ [2] https://getfedora.org/ [3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Websites/Developer [4] https://github.com/developer-portal/content [5] https://github.com/developer-portal/website -- Petr Hracek Software Engineer Developer Experience Red Hat, Inc Mob: +420777056169 email: phracek(a)redhat.com

7 9

E&S WG request for input on requirements for Fedora Developer Portal
by Jens-Ulrik Petersen 21 Jul '15

21 Jul '15

Hi, In the last Env & Stacks meeting last week there was discussion about plans, direction, and content for the Fedora Developer Portal website that is under construction. I think the plan is make the E&S WG more actively involved in overseeing the content on the Portal. Anyway as part of the discussion it was suggested by Langdon that it would be good to reach out to the WS WG for input on its requirements and suggestions for the Developer Portal since one of the main targets of Fedora WS is developers. Since I am on both WGs I offered to liase on this topic. What kind of content, requirements or suggestions does the WS WG have for the Developer Portal? References: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Websites/Developer https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Env_and_Stacks/Projects/DeveloperPortal Thanks, Jens ps I planned to bring this up before the WS WG meeting today but I got back late so posting it here now: not sure there would have been time to discuss it in the irc meeting anyway...

6 6

Developer subsite as a self-contained change proposal (was Re: Meeting minutes for Env-and-Stacks WG meeting (2015-07-16))
by Nick Coghlan 20 Jul '15

20 Jul '15

On 16 July 2015 at 23:09, Václav Pavlín <vpavlin(a)redhat.com> wrote: > * Developer Site for Fedora Project (vpavlin, 12:41:12) > * LINK: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Env_and_Stacks/Projects/DeveloperPortal > (vpavlin, 12:43:10) > * LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Websites/Developer (phracek, > 12:43:43) In relation to this, I've updated the content on the new Env & Stacks subpage to eliminate the duplication with phracek's existing plan for setting up the initial site and instead specifically cover the idea of putting the subsite forward as Fedora level self-contained change proposal. Where I think Env & Stacks can potentially help the project is in having the WG take overall responsibility for the site's content, including coordinating with the other WGs if they're making major changes to the recommendations. We'd also be the first point of escalation if there's an argument about what tools the developer portal should be recommending. Where I think getting directly involved in this particular project will help Envs & Stacks is that "we're responsible for the Fedora Developer Portal" conveys the essential purpose of the group in a practical way, both for folks participating in the WG, and those outside it wondering why we're here :) Regards, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan(a)gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia

2 3

Starting to take a look at Conary
by Nick Coghlan 14 Jul '15

14 Jul '15

At Matt Miller's recommendation, I added Conary to the list of packaging tools I'm investigating as a possible language independent user level package management system: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Env_and_Stacks/Projects/UserLevelPackageMana… (Sam Kottler actually suggested Conary to me at Flock a couple of years ago, but I never got around to investigating it) In trying to research that, I was having a lot of trouble finding useful docs, so I filed an issue about that on their GitHub issue tracker: https://github.com/sassoftware/conary/issues/2 Near term, they pointed out the clone of their old wiki from the rPath days: https://opensource.sas.com/conarywiki/index.php/Main_Page Longer term, they've started putting updated docs together at http://sassoftware.github.io/conary/ (very bare bones at the moment, but I suggested they look at MediaWiki export + Pandoc to convert some of the old docs from the wiki clone). They also mentioned that they've finally been able to fully open source rBuilder itself, and pointed out http://sassoftware.github.io/appengine/quickstart.html for folks that would like to try out conary, rmake and rbuild in a prebuilt VM. Regards, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan(a)gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia

2 1

Two phase candidate package review (was Re: Council Engineering update)
by Nick Coghlan 13 Jul '15

13 Jul '15

On 13 July 2015 at 17:49, Pierre-Yves Chibon <pingou(a)pingoured.fr> wrote: > On Sun, Jul 12, 2015 at 02:54:21PM +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote: >> On 10 July 2015 at 16:24, Honza Horak <hhorak(a)redhat.com> wrote: >> > * shortly summarize plans for upcoming Fedora releases (F23/F24) in their >> > fields of interests and send it to working group ML or update in [2] >> >> For me, I'm hoping to work with the Fresque developers >> (https://github.com/fedora-infra/fresque/issues/9) to get the main >> package review workflow out of Bugzilla, with a view to then following >> up on the idea of splitting the package review process into a >> preliminary redistribution review (which can be handled by any Fedora >> Contributor and amounts to "good enough for custom development work"), >> and a packaging policy compliance review (which would match the >> current review process and amounts to "good enough to consider for >> operational deployment without in-house developer support"). > > The first review being something along the line of: Good for copr (playground?) > and the later along the line of: Good for the main repo ? Roughly speaking, yeah. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Env_and_Stacks/Projects/PackageReviewProcess… goes into detail on my current thinking. Nothing much changes in Aleph 0->2 - those are basically "Fedora as it exists today", and I'd expect the Base and Edition WGs and the individual language SIGs to define the specific policies for those. The key new concept is the idea of a more explicit "redistribution review" that just checks: * that the component complies with Fedora's licensing policies * that the component appears to have been published in good faith * that the component appears to be benign Unlike the main packaging review (which focuses on the software itself), this would focus more on reviewing how the software was created, and whether or not redistributing it might present a risk to either the Fedora project or Fedora's users. At the moment, that step is effectively part of creating and publishing COPR repos, my idea would be to split it out even further so you could do that level of review without creating an RPM at all. However, adding that step into the *current* package review process would be difficult, as there'd be a lot of education work to be done in changing the way folks use Bugzilla. With a separate review server, it becomes much easier to split the review process into two steps, and allow a package under review to sit at the second review stage indefinitely. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan(a)gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

env-and-stacks July 2015