-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
================================================================ #fedora-meeting-1: Fedora Server SIG Weekly Meeting (2018-04-03) ================================================================
Meeting started by sgallagh at 20:00:17 UTC. The full logs are available athttps://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2018-04-03/serversig.2018... .
Meeting summary - --------------- * Roll Call (sgallagh, 20:00:18)
* Agenda (sgallagh, 20:06:40) * Agenda Item: Brainstorming (sgallagh, 20:06:46)
* Brainstorming (sgallagh, 20:07:36) * Feedback: Fedora Server has too short a lifecycle (sgallagh, 20:08:35) * Feedback: Fedora Server should be more minimalistic (sgallagh, 20:08:35) * Feedback: SELinux needs better usability (sgallagh, 20:08:35) * Feedback: Support OpenCL (sgallagh, 20:08:36) * Feedback: Easy "home media server" would be nice (sgallagh, 20:08:36) * Feedback: Cockpit should be able to control more of the system (sgallagh, 20:08:36) * Feedback: Focus on simplifying common task execution (sgallagh, 20:08:36) * Feedback: Support enterprise HBAs (sgallagh, 20:08:37) * We will go through the list individually (sgallagh, 20:11:46)
* Fedora Server has too short a lifecycle (sgallagh, 20:12:01) * The core problem that people want to solve generally is "I don't want my applications to break, because I rely on them" (sgallagh, 20:14:16) * Rephrased: Core problem is "I want to be able to keep my system up-to-date wrt bug and security fixes without my applications breaking" (sgallagh, 20:16:35) * Users automatically assume that the classic solution to this problem is the only one: longer compatibility lifecycle for the whole OS. (sgallagh, 20:17:34) * Fedora Server attempts to solve the core problem with Modules and reliable OS release upgrades. (sgallagh, 20:18:25) * Enhancement proposal: automatically upgrade when release is EOL (sgallagh, 20:22:03) * Enhancement proposal supplement: Cockpit UI for scheduling the automatic update after EOL (sgallagh, 20:23:11)
* Fedora Server should be more minimalistic (sgallagh, 20:27:38) * This topic is really easy to get rat-holed on. Will revisit later. (sgallagh, 20:40:44)
* SELinux needs better usability (sgallagh, 20:40:52) * Cockpit SELinux Troubleshooter improvements would be ideal for this (sgallagh, 20:43:59)
* Support OpenCL (sgallagh, 20:46:42) * This task would require specialized expertise that isn't readily available (sgallagh, 20:48:40)
* Easy "home media server" (sgallagh, 20:48:56)
* Server Focus (sgallagh, 20:55:07) * Q: Is there a customer story similar to our previous OLPC effort that we could get behind? (sgallagh, 20:55:41) * LINK: https://freedombox.org/ ? (nirik, 20:56:01) * ACTION: Homework assignment: Think of an OLPC-style initiative that Server could back and present it next week. (sgallagh, 21:00:24)
Meeting ended at 21:04:33 UTC.
Action Items - ------------ * Homework assignment: Think of an OLPC-style initiative that Server could back and present it next week.
Action Items, by person - ----------------------- * **UNASSIGNED** * Homework assignment: Think of an OLPC-style initiative that Server could back and present it next week.
People Present (lines said) - --------------------------- * sgallagh (129) * dperpeet (46) * nirik (39) * smooge (13) * bowlofeggs (11) * orc_fedo_ (8) * zodbot (7)
Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4
.. _`MeetBot`: http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot
- Brainstorming (sgallagh, 20:07:36)
- Feedback: Fedora Server has too short a lifecycle (sgallagh, 20:08:35)
- Feedback: Fedora Server should be more minimalistic (sgallagh, 20:08:35)
- Feedback: SELinux needs better usability (sgallagh, 20:08:35)
- Feedback: Support OpenCL (sgallagh, 20:08:36)
What does that even mean? OpenCL on it's own is basically useless without particular frameworks on top of it that enable it to be useful. Like most other hardware features just enabling it doesn't often make it useful, eg an ethernet NIC on it's own isn't very useful with out say a full IP stack on top.
- Feedback: Easy "home media server" would be nice (sgallagh, 20:08:36)
TBH I think that's quite a divergence from a typical "enterprise server" that the Server SIG has targetted.
Feedback: Cockpit should be able to control more of the system (sgallagh, 20:08:36)
Feedback: Focus on simplifying common task execution (sgallagh, 20:08:36)
Feedback: Support enterprise HBAs (sgallagh, 20:08:37)
We will go through the list individually (sgallagh, 20:11:46)
Fedora Server has too short a lifecycle (sgallagh, 20:12:01)
- The core problem that people want to solve generally is "I don't want my applications to break, because I rely on them" (sgallagh, 20:14:16)
- Rephrased: Core problem is "I want to be able to keep my system up-to-date wrt bug and security fixes without my applications breaking" (sgallagh, 20:16:35)
- Users automatically assume that the classic solution to this problem is the only one: longer compatibility lifecycle for the whole OS. (sgallagh, 20:17:34)
- Fedora Server attempts to solve the core problem with Modules and reliable OS release upgrades. (sgallagh, 20:18:25)
- Enhancement proposal: automatically upgrade when release is EOL (sgallagh, 20:22:03)
- Enhancement proposal supplement: Cockpit UI for scheduling the automatic update after EOL (sgallagh, 20:23:11)
Fedora Server should be more minimalistic (sgallagh, 20:27:38)
- This topic is really easy to get rat-holed on. Will revisit later. (sgallagh, 20:40:44)
This is sort of in contradiction to some of the other points like media server.
SELinux needs better usability (sgallagh, 20:40:52)
- Cockpit SELinux Troubleshooter improvements would be ideal for this (sgallagh, 20:43:59)
Support OpenCL (sgallagh, 20:46:42)
- This task would require specialized expertise that isn't readily available (sgallagh, 20:48:40)
Easy "home media server" (sgallagh, 20:48:56)
Server Focus (sgallagh, 20:55:07)
- Q: Is there a customer story similar to our previous OLPC effort that we could get behind? (sgallagh, 20:55:41)
- LINK: https://freedombox.org/ ? (nirik, 20:56:01)
- ACTION: Homework assignment: Think of an OLPC-style initiative that Server could back and present it next week. (sgallagh, 21:00:24)
What do you mean by OLPC effort/initiative? Do you mean a piece of hardware that could be purchased off the shelf and be a good "Server reference platform" or something else entirely.
On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 10:05:12AM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
- Feedback: Easy "home media server" would be nice (sgallagh, 20:08:36)
TBH I think that's quite a divergence from a typical "enterprise server" that the Server SIG has targetted.
But this is probably much closer to what "real-world" Fedora server deployments are.
On Sun, Apr 8, 2018 at 12:01 PM, Tomasz Torcz 👁️ tomek@pipebreaker.pl wrote:
On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 10:05:12AM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
- Feedback: Easy "home media server" would be nice (sgallagh, 20:08:36)
TBH I think that's quite a divergence from a typical "enterprise server" that the Server SIG has targetted.
But this is probably much closer to what "real-world" Fedora server deployments are.
What details have you got to back that up? I know of a lot of users of Fedora Server that use it in an enterprise context, a lot more than in a media server context.
On Sun, Apr 8, 2018 at 7:09 AM Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Apr 8, 2018 at 12:01 PM, Tomasz Torcz 👁️ tomek@pipebreaker.pl wrote:
On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 10:05:12AM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
- Feedback: Easy "home media server" would be nice (sgallagh, 20:08:36)
TBH I think that's quite a divergence from a typical "enterprise server" that the Server SIG has targetted.
But this is probably much closer to what "real-world" Fedora server deployments are.
What details have you got to back that up? I know of a lot of users of Fedora Server that use it in an enterprise context, a lot more than in a media server context.
Just a quick comment: these topics were all addressing feedback from different (anonymize) respondents. Please read the full meeting log for details.
The two topics in question here were unrelated and were separate suggestions for how we might proceed. No decision was yet made, as we are currently going through a brainstorming exercise.
On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 12:08:23PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
On Sun, Apr 8, 2018 at 12:01 PM, Tomasz Torcz 👁️ tomek@pipebreaker.pl wrote:
On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 10:05:12AM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
- Feedback: Easy "home media server" would be nice (sgallagh, 20:08:36)
TBH I think that's quite a divergence from a typical "enterprise server" that the Server SIG has targetted.
But this is probably much closer to what "real-world" Fedora server deployments are.
What details have you got to back that up? I know of a lot of users of Fedora Server that use it in an enterprise context, a lot more than in a media server context.
Gut feeling, anecdata (with me included). I believe you know enterprise Fedora users, but around my acquaintances home deployments are much more prevalent. I would love to see more Fedora usage in companies. I think the proposition is not about dismissing enterprise servers. It is about recognizing *the other* big group of Fedora deployment and treating both groups equally.
On Sun, Apr 8, 2018 at 5:05 AM Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com wrote:
- Brainstorming (sgallagh, 20:07:36)
- Feedback: Fedora Server has too short a lifecycle (sgallagh, 20:08:35)
- Feedback: Fedora Server should be more minimalistic (sgallagh, 20:08:35)
- Feedback: SELinux needs better usability (sgallagh, 20:08:35)
- Feedback: Support OpenCL (sgallagh, 20:08:36)
What does that even mean? OpenCL on it's own is basically useless without particular frameworks on top of it that enable it to be useful. Like most other hardware features just enabling it doesn't often make it useful, eg an ethernet NIC on it's own isn't very useful with out say a full IP stack on top.
- Feedback: Easy "home media server" would be nice (sgallagh, 20:08:36)
TBH I think that's quite a divergence from a typical "enterprise server" that the Server SIG has targetted.
Feedback: Cockpit should be able to control more of the system (sgallagh, 20:08:36)
Feedback: Focus on simplifying common task execution (sgallagh, 20:08:36)
Feedback: Support enterprise HBAs (sgallagh, 20:08:37)
We will go through the list individually (sgallagh, 20:11:46)
Fedora Server has too short a lifecycle (sgallagh, 20:12:01)
- The core problem that people want to solve generally is "I don't want my applications to break, because I rely on them" (sgallagh, 20:14:16)
- Rephrased: Core problem is "I want to be able to keep my system up-to-date wrt bug and security fixes without my applications breaking" (sgallagh, 20:16:35)
- Users automatically assume that the classic solution to this problem is the only one: longer compatibility lifecycle for the whole OS. (sgallagh, 20:17:34)
- Fedora Server attempts to solve the core problem with Modules and reliable OS release upgrades. (sgallagh, 20:18:25)
- Enhancement proposal: automatically upgrade when release is EOL (sgallagh, 20:22:03)
- Enhancement proposal supplement: Cockpit UI for scheduling the automatic update after EOL (sgallagh, 20:23:11)
Fedora Server should be more minimalistic (sgallagh, 20:27:38)
- This topic is really easy to get rat-holed on. Will revisit later. (sgallagh, 20:40:44)
This is sort of in contradiction to some of the other points like media server.
SELinux needs better usability (sgallagh, 20:40:52)
- Cockpit SELinux Troubleshooter improvements would be ideal for this (sgallagh, 20:43:59)
Support OpenCL (sgallagh, 20:46:42)
- This task would require specialized expertise that isn't readily available (sgallagh, 20:48:40)
Easy "home media server" (sgallagh, 20:48:56)
Server Focus (sgallagh, 20:55:07)
- Q: Is there a customer story similar to our previous OLPC effort that we could get behind? (sgallagh, 20:55:41)
- LINK: https://freedombox.org/ ? (nirik, 20:56:01)
- ACTION: Homework assignment: Think of an OLPC-style initiative that Server could back and present it next week. (sgallagh, 21:00:24)
What do you mean by OLPC effort/initiative? Do you mean a piece of hardware that could be purchased off the shelf and be a good "Server reference platform" or something else entirely. _______________________________________________
Not specifically about hardware but about aligning ourselves with another community/initiative/humanitarian activity and aiding them.
An example might be working with a charity that is setting up satellite internet access in remote locations by helping build up network infrastructure built atop Fedora Server (to pull an example out of the air).
On Sunday, 08 April 2018 at 11:05, Peter Robinson wrote:
- Brainstorming (sgallagh, 20:07:36)
- Feedback: Fedora Server has too short a lifecycle (sgallagh, 20:08:35)
- Feedback: Fedora Server should be more minimalistic (sgallagh, 20:08:35)
- Feedback: SELinux needs better usability (sgallagh, 20:08:35)
- Feedback: Support OpenCL (sgallagh, 20:08:36)
What does that even mean? OpenCL on it's own is basically useless without particular frameworks on top of it that enable it to be useful. Like most other hardware features just enabling it doesn't often make it useful, eg an ethernet NIC on it's own isn't very useful with out say a full IP stack on top.
If a "compute node" can be considered a valid use case for Fedora Server, then there are quite a few scientific applications supporting OpenCL.
- Feedback: Easy "home media server" would be nice (sgallagh, 20:08:36)
TBH I think that's quite a divergence from a typical "enterprise server" that the Server SIG has targetted.
FWIW, I'm using Fedora for this scenario.
Regards, Dominik
On Sun, Apr 8, 2018 at 9:40 PM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski dominik@greysector.net wrote:
On Sunday, 08 April 2018 at 11:05, Peter Robinson wrote:
- Brainstorming (sgallagh, 20:07:36)
- Feedback: Fedora Server has too short a lifecycle (sgallagh, 20:08:35)
- Feedback: Fedora Server should be more minimalistic (sgallagh, 20:08:35)
- Feedback: SELinux needs better usability (sgallagh, 20:08:35)
- Feedback: Support OpenCL (sgallagh, 20:08:36)
What does that even mean? OpenCL on it's own is basically useless without particular frameworks on top of it that enable it to be useful. Like most other hardware features just enabling it doesn't often make it useful, eg an ethernet NIC on it's own isn't very useful with out say a full IP stack on top.
If a "compute node" can be considered a valid use case for Fedora Server, then there are quite a few scientific applications supporting OpenCL.
It's not as simple as ticking the "OpenCL box" though, Fedora already has reasonable OpenCL support, the issue in this space is most of the industry is focused on things like TensorFlow, CAFFE and other such frameworks that make compute useful and all of those use CUDA. You need toolchains, frameworks and a lot of other stuff on top of the "we support OpenCL" box to take it from a tick box to useful.
server@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski -
Peter Robinson -
Stephen Gallagher -
Tomasz Torcz 👁️