server November 2017

server@lists.fedoraproject.org

10 participants
14 discussions

Proposed F27 Final Server (non-modular) release, special Go/No-Go meeting tomorrow
by Adam Williamson 29 Nov '17

29 Nov '17

Hi, folks. Just wanted to flag this up for anyone interested who wasn't aware of it. The Server SIG and Council have recently decided that there will be no official Fedora 27 Modular Server final release. They have also decided that we will aim to officially "release" the existing Fedora 27 Server GA images - these were built, and in fact shipped to mirrors, they simply are not exposed via getfedora.org etc. at the moment. To this end, there will be a special Go/No-Go meeting tomorrow - 2017- 11-30 at 1800 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 - where we will decide for sure whether to 'sign off' on the release of the existing Server deliverables from the F27 Final GA compose (Fedora-27-20171105.0 / RC- 1.6). I have re-opened the F27FinalBlocker tracker bug for this purpose: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=F27FinalBlocker If you believe any bug should block the 'release', please propose it as a blocker by marking it as blocking that bug and we will discuss it during the meeting. Please do come along to the meeting if you think you have any kind of useful input, or you just want to watch. :) For more information on why all this is happening, please see: https://pagure.io/Fedora-Council/tickets/issue/149 (Council ticket) https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2017-11-28/serversig.201… (server meeting log) https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/teams/council/council.2017-11-29-14.00.lo… (council meeting log) -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net

1 0

Fedora-Modular validation events disabled
by Adam Williamson 29 Nov '17

29 Nov '17

Hi, folks. So over the last couple of days, the Server SIG and the Council have decided not to go ahead with a Fedora Modular Server 27 release. Accordingly, I've disabled the creation of the special Modular validation events (though I've left all the code that supports them in place just in case we turn out to need it in future). 20171123.n.1 will remain as the 'current' Modular validation event, but it is my understanding that no further validation testing work is required, and we can focus on Fedora 28 so far as the validation process goes. My current understanding is that for Fedora 28 we plan to roll modular deliverables into the main compose process, so we will once again have only one compose series to validate. However, I don't know what the timeline for this to happen is at present. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net

1 0

Server SIG Weekly Meeting Minutes (2017-11-28)
by Stephen Gallagher 28 Nov '17

28 Nov '17

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 ================================================================ #fedora-meeting-1: Fedora Server SIG Weekly Meeting (2017-11-28) ================================================================ Meeting started by sgallagh at 21:00:13 UTC. The full logs are available athttps://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2017-11-28/serversig.2… . Meeting summary - --------------- * Roll Call (sgallagh, 21:00:13) * Agenda (sgallagh, 21:03:44) * Agenda Item: To GA or not GA, that is the question. (sgallagh, 21:03:44) * To GA or not GA, that is the question. (sgallagh, 21:06:36) * LINK: https://pagure.io/Fedora-Council/tickets/issue/149 (sgallagh, 21:07:17) * AGREED: Server SIG does not want to ship a formal GA of Fedora 27 Modular Server (sgallagh, 21:32:39) * LINK: https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/compose/Fedora-Modular-27-20171128.n.1/ is the most recent for e.g. (adamw, 21:37:06) * AGREED: The Server WG recommendation is not to bother with a Boltron 2 release, but this is ultimately up to the Council and the Modularity WG to decide. (sgallagh, 21:49:58) * LINK: https://pagure.io/Fedora-Council/tickets/issue/149#comment-481872 (adamw, 21:52:59) * AGREED: Since the GA RC compose passed the Server tests, Server WG would like to just release the Server Edition content from that compose as the official Fedora 27 Server Edition (sgallagh, 22:02:35) Meeting ended at 22:07:03 UTC. Action Items - ------------ Action Items, by person - ----------------------- * **UNASSIGNED** * (none) People Present (lines said) - --------------------------- * sgallagh (99) * adamw (61) * langdon (35) * smooge (28) * nirik (26) * zodbot (18) * asamalik (8) * mattdm (6) * mjwolf (4) * dperpeet (3) Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4 .. _`MeetBot`: http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: Mailvelope v2.0.0 Comment: https://www.mailvelope.com wkYEAREIABAFAlod3isJEHolVWI2uqOjAADhCACgkvFOYpjr8wT+q6sUOMdS ddbjTPcAn0a+hZIIwBzwFrF+BAZkaDAbc7rI =u9W4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: Important: tomorrow's meeting will be a special session Modular Server
by Stephen Gallagher 28 Nov '17

28 Nov '17

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 8:26 AM Matthew Miller <mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote: > We're going to delay Stef's presentation on CI until next week, because > this is a fairly urgent decision with a lot of consequences. See > discussion in ticket at > <https://pagure.io/Fedora-Council/tickets/issue/149>. > > Ideally, I'd like to get that all hashed out in the meeting tomorrow. > An hour isn't a lot of time if discussion goes every which way, so I'll > spend a little bit of time today thinking about how to break up the > questions so we can be efficient with our "live" time. > I'm also putting this as the sole item on the agenda for today's Server SIG meeting, so it would probably be a good idea if folks attended that if at all possible (I know it's late in Europe; it's at 1600 EST)

1 0

2017-11-27 @ 17:00 UTC - Fedora 27/28 Blocker Review Meeting
by Adam Williamson 26 Nov '17

26 Nov '17

# F27/28 Blocker Review meeting # Date: 2017-11-27 # Time: 17:00 UTC # Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.freenode.net Hi folks! We have one proposed blocker for Modular Server Final, and a few proposed blockers for Fedora 28 Beta and Final, so let's have a quick review meeting tomorrow. If you have time tonight, you can take a look at the proposed or accepted blockers before the meeting - the full lists can be found here: https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/ . We'll be evaluating these bugs to see if they violate any of the Release Criteria and warrant the blocking of a release if they're not fixed. Information on the release criteria for F27/28 can be found on the wiki [0]. For more information about the Blocker and Freeze exception process, check out these links: - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_blocker_bug_process - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_freeze_exception_bug_process And for those of you who are curious how a Blocker Review Meeting works - or how it's supposed to go and you want to run one - check out the SOP on the wiki: - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting Have a good evening and see you tomorrow! [0] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Release_Criteria -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net

1 0

Fedora-Modular 27 Branched 20171123.n.1 nightly compose nominated for testing
by Adam Williamson 24 Nov '17

24 Nov '17

Announcing the creation of a new nightly release validation test event for Fedora-Modular 27 Branched 20171123.n.1. Please help run some tests for this nightly compose if you have time. For more information on nightly release validation testing, see: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Release_validation_test_plan Test coverage information for the current release can be seen at: https://www.happyassassin.net/testcase_stats/27modular You can see all results, find testing instructions and image download locations, and enter results on the Summary page: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_Modular_27_Branched_2017… The individual test result pages are: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_Modular_27_Branched_2017… https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_Modular_27_Branched_2017… https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_Modular_27_Branched_2017… Thank you for testing! -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net

1 0

Fedora 27 Modular Server release validation
by Adam Williamson 21 Nov '17

21 Nov '17

Hi folks! So it's been an open question exactly how we would do release validation for the Modular Server release. For Beta, we wound up trying to co-ordinate it via mailing list and IRC; I thought doing it this way would be sufficient and save time trying to set up a parallel stream of wiki validation events. However, I don't think it really turned out that well; we didn't have a great overview of test coverage at the Beta go/no-go meeting, and just wound up shipping it more or less on a handwave. And people keep asking about where they can find and report results for the Modular Server composes. So, I went ahead and spent the last couple of days enhancing all the release validation bits to handle having release validation events for Modular composes, in a way which hopefully won't screw anything up. The way it *should* work, if I got it all right, is this: The fedmsg consumer which automatically creates release validation events will now also create events for Fedora-Modular 27 composes, following the exact same rules it follows for creating regular validation events. I have also created an initial Modular validation event, for the Beta-1.5 compose we signed off as the Modular Server Beta. And I have set things up so there's a new set of 'Current' redirect pages for the Modular events, with 'Current_Modular' in their name: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Modular_Summary https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Modular_Installation_Te… https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Modular_Server_Test https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Modular_Base_Test At present those links will redirect you to the Beta 1.5 pages. You'll notice the page names follow the same basic scheme as for non-modular events, just with "Fedora Modular" replacing "Fedora". This similarly applies to all the category names, so there is now a "Fedora Modular 27 Beta Test Results" category and so on. You may note the contents of the Installation and Base results pages are a bit different, effectively I've cut them down to the bits that are relevant to a compose which is intended to deliver only Server bits. This is achieved by using separate matrix template pages: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Template:Base_modular_test_matrix https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Template:Installation_modular_test_matrix I'm usually the only one who edits the matrix templates anyway, but thought I'd note it just in case. Naturally, if you want to change the result pages for modular events, you edit the modular template pages, and vice versa. Server_modular_test_matrix exists but is just a redirect to Server_test_matrix , as we don't want those tables to differ at all. For Modular events, only Installation, Server and Base pages are created; Desktop and Cloud are not needed or relevant. The consumer should create a new event for a nightly compose as soon as one appears that has significant package differences from the Beta 1.5 compose. Events for modular composes should be announced by email just as non-modular events are; the text of the email is of course adjusted slightly to distinguish between modular and non-modular events. openQA results should get forwarded to the wiki just as they do for non-modular composes (I have forwarded the results for Beta 1.5 to the wiki to test the mechanism, for future composes/events it should happen automatically). All the relval sub-commands now support operating on modular composes/events. So you can use relval to create modular events (though, again, normally the fedmsg consumer will do this for us automatically, no-one needs to do it manually), report results for modular composes, run the image size checks on modular composes, and do the user-stats and testcase-stats analysis for modular composes. For each sub-command, a new argument `--modular` is available which tells it to operate on a modular compose/event/set of events. For report- results, you can run just `relval report-results --modular` to report results for the current Modular validation event. You can find testcase_stats for 27 Modular at https://www.happyassassin.net/testcase_stats/27modular/ . This link will be included in announcement emails for Modular validation events. Updates are available for EPEL 7, Fedora 25, Fedora 26 and Fedora 27 containing the updated relval, python-wikitcms and fedfind packages. I've just submitted these, so they should reach updates-testing shortly. If you want to use relval to report results for modular composes, you'll want to update to the new versions (fedfind 3.8.0, python-wikitcms 2.2.0, relval 2.2.0). Ultimately, for the Final phase of the Fedora 27 Modular Server release, we should be able to do release validation just as we do for regular releases. For now I've implemented all of this with two assumptions: we're only going to have this split 'regular / modular server' schedule for F27, and the modular composes won't have any bits we care about besides server bits. If either of those assumptions turns out to be wrong, we'll have to revisit this again. Please do drop me a line if you spot anything wrong/weird/broken- looking in any of this modular handling. Thanks! -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net

2 1

Proposal to CANCEL: 2017-11-20 blocker review meeting
by Adam Williamson 16 Nov '17

16 Nov '17

Hi folks! I'm proposing we cancel the blocker review meeting for Monday, as there are no proposed Server Final blockers at present. Please yell if you think we will need to run a meeting. However, I'm on vacation on Monday, so if we do need to run a meeting, someone else will have to lead. Thanks! -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net

1 0

Proposal to CANCEL: 2017-11-13 blocker review meeting
by Adam Williamson 10 Nov '17

10 Nov '17

Hi folks! I'm proposing we cancel the blocker review meeting for Monday, as there are no proposed Server Final blockers at present. Please yell if you think we will need to run a meeting. Thanks! -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net

1 0

Name of the next Fedora Server release
by Andrea Bolognani 08 Nov '17

08 Nov '17

Hi there! According to Langdon this topic has not really been discussed properly yet, so I'd like to bring it up now. I know it's kinda late, but hopefully not quite *too* late :) Long story short, I'm not sure releasing the output of the Modularity effort as Fedora Server, which seems to be the current plan, is necessarily the best idea. The Fedora Server moniker has been used for a pretty long while now, and in that time users have come to expect certain things from it. Modularity causes some of those expectations not to be met in its current form. Quick example: # dnf install screen No match for argument: screen Error: Unable to find a match For users who have not been paying close attention to recent Fedora development, and are just downloading the Fedora Server 27 .iso expecting it to be "Fedora Server 26, but with newer software", installing the new OS and hitting something like that right away could lead to some frustration. Looking up more information about Modularity would certainly explain things in a satisfactory manner, but the importance of first impressions should not be underestimated. At the same time, calling the output of the Modularity effort Fedora Server doesn't do much to highlight just how much of a reimagining of the traditional server OS it is. Based on the above, my proposal is to drop the Fedora Server moniker entirely and release as Fedora Modular Server instead. The advantage of doing so is that using a different name signals a clear break from previous Fedora Server releases: it's a new product, one that you shouldn't expect to be a drop-in replacement. It's also a name that you haven't heard before, which might pique your interest even if you haven't been using Fedora up until now. I think it would have a positive outcome on the way this release is received. Moreover, the repositories themselves are already named like that! So it would be just[1] a matter of doubling down on that name and making sure it's being used consistently everywhere. Looking forward to your feedback :) [1] Note that I have no idea how much actual work that would entail -- Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization

8 15

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

server November 2017