Two-Week Atomic actual deliverables

[Adam Miller]

On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 12:27 PM, Joe Brockmeier <jzb at redhat.com> wrote:
> On 09/11/2015 12:59 PM, Adam Miller wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 10:59 AM, Matthew Miller
>> <mattdm at fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 01:02:10PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
>>>> * Vagrant boxes:
>>>>   - same tunir-based test suite in VM environemnt
>>>
>>> Followup! Kushal points out that we are testing the KVM vagrant images
>>> in this way, but not testing VirtualBox. (Because we don't have
>>> VirtualBox in Fedora or EPEL, because out-of-tree kernel modules.).
>>> Like the qcow2->ec2 thing, these are the same bits as something that
>>> _is_ autotested, but run in a different environment. Unlike qcow2->ec2,
>>> we aren't even doing a boot test.
>>>
>>>
>>> Things which could go wrong which I see are:
>>>
>>> * some VirtualBox-specific thing with booting an updated kernel or
>>>   grub2 (for example, updated kernel missing some drivers or something
>>>   that VirtualBox needs)
>>>
>>> * some corruption or something in the image conversion
>>>
>>> These seem mostly unlikely, but far from impossible.
>>>
>>>
>>> Since VirtualBox is the format the vast majority of Vagrant users will
>>> want, that's... kind of a big deal. *sigh* Options I can see here are:
>>>
>>> A) Scramble to find some way to do the VirtualBox testing.
>>>
>>> B) Don't publish the VirtualBox images.
>>>
>>> C) Publish the VirtualBox images, but put them in a Penalty Box with
>>>    extra warnings
>>>
>>> Any other ideas? Preferences? B seems the most responsible, yet also
>>> the most sad. A would be highly unusual for our infrastructure. C could
>>> expose us to looking bad if support breaks and no one notices.
>>
>> I'm pretty neutral on B or C. I don't really care and also don't think it
>> should even remotely be a concern of ours. Not only do we not have
>> testing for it but we don't even have the building blocks in place to
>> work towards testing it. VirtualBox is bad and those who use it should
>> feel bad.[0]
>
> Damn, man. That's harsh and probably not a great way to bring people
> into the fold.
>
> ("should feel bad" I mean. I don't disagree on the merits of VB, it's
> not good.)

That wasn't fair, it was rude, and it certainly wasn't friendly. My apologies.

>
>> This is probably not a popular opinion and I'm fine with that, but we
>> would have to install something that we very publicly speak out
>> against in order to test this. I'm not yet ready to throw out Fedora's
>> values for the sake of some OS X user's convenience but that's just
>> me.
>
> Which of the values would we be compromising here to test something with
> GPL'ed software? I realize that out of band modules aren't awesome, but
> I wasn't aware this was a project-level value [1]

This is a fair observation, I often intermix the technical guidelines
and best practices with what are more so considered "Values" but the
distinction is something I don't know that I care to debate. I'll just
agree to disagree where necessary on this topic.

What I was referring to is:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#No_External_Kernel_Modules

>
> The "some OS X user" that we're trying to reach with VirtualBox-friendly
> images today is a potential Fedora desktop user tomorrow. I would
> totally agree we shouldn't compromise by using proprietary software, but
> using fully GPL'ed software to test something... that doesn't seem like
> a violation of Fedora values to me. (Note I'm differentiating between
> "values" and best practices/packaging guidelines/etc. here.)

I said it wasn't going to be a popular opinion and I'm fine with that.
I also think that it's far stretch that we're going to convert OS X
users to Fedora Workstation since the thing that we're trying to
target here is effectively a headless cloud image but that's fine,
I'll step off that one.

-AdamM

>
> [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Overview#Our_Core_Values
>
> --
> Joe Brockmeier | Community Team, OSAS
> jzb at redhat.com | http://community.redhat.com/
> Twitter: @jzb  | http://dissociatedpress.net/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cloud mailing list
> cloud at lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
> Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
>