<div dir="ltr"><pre style="white-space:pre-wrap;color:rgb(0,0,0)">>Hi John!
>As Fedora Server is a community project driven by whoever is
>interested in doing the work, certainly we'd like your help on things.
>I want to clarify first that I think you have the wrong idea about
>what a "Server Role" is. The idea is for a server role to be a
>singular task for the server to perform. A machine may be assigned
>multiple roles, but they should be managed individually.
>I don't see us having a "Small Business" role, in part because that
>implies many different things to many different people. Instead, we'd
>be talking more about roles like "Domain Controller", "ownCloud
>Services" or "OpenStack Node".
>We *do* need to start talking about whether we want a graphical option
>for Fedora Server 22. We expressly deferred that decision because our
>initial target was focusing on headless systems.
>John, would you mind running down the use-cases you have for having a
>local graphical login on your servers (as opposed to remote services
>like SSH or web-based configuration tools like Ajenti or Cockpit)?</pre><pre style="white-space:pre-wrap;color:rgb(0,0,0)"><br></pre><pre style="white-space:pre-wrap;color:rgb(0,0,0)">Okay, I understand. Well I think you do have a point there. It would kinda break the flow of the list in the installation process (Now thinking about it). However I am just now looking at the chat log of you all talking about having multiple roles in one single physical server (If my context clues are right).</pre><pre style="white-space:pre-wrap;color:rgb(0,0,0)">I know for the beta and I think the full release you want just the base + essential server roles, and then later down the road your going to define more. How about you leave the essential roles for now that way you will have somewhat have a base to go off of other servers (ownCloud, Round Cube, HPC roles, etc.), BUT create a template so that members of the community can create there own roles and add it to a repo list. Kinda like having the Play Store on Android but for servers. I know you are still in Alpha phase but this is just something to consider, but I digress. </pre><pre style="white-space:pre-wrap;color:rgb(0,0,0)">As for use-cases, I see it like this:</pre><pre style="white-space:pre-wrap;color:rgb(0,0,0)">Case 1: Migration of servers.</pre><pre style="white-space:pre-wrap;color:rgb(0,0,0)">Ex: Server A is a old model so were going to migrate the configuration to the new Server A. (You really have to be there physically there to mess with hardware / networking)</pre><pre style="white-space:pre-wrap;color:rgb(0,0,0)">Case 2: Install / Remove Hardware.</pre><pre style="white-space:pre-wrap;color:rgb(0,0,0)">Ex: Faulty RAM / CPU / Hard drive (That is not hotswapable) you want a quick way to identify the server and turn it off from a KVM inside the rack. (Not all company's will have a dedicated machine to SSH or go into a web-browser to configure these things. They may still have KVM's inside there cabinets.)</pre><pre style="white-space:pre-wrap;color:rgb(0,0,0)">Case 3: Installation of server software (Open Source AND Proprietary).</pre><pre style="white-space:pre-wrap;color:rgb(0,0,0)">Ex: Bitnami + your appliance, a appliance software stack where you can install it in a VM or locally inside a desktop. However you need to have a GUI to configure / start/stop / view logs to install locally. (They still have there own web interface in a browser but you still need a GUI to install it.)</pre><pre style="white-space:pre-wrap;color:rgb(0,0,0)">Sidenote: Case 3 ~ When you install Bitnami + your appliance locally it uses the Container feature like Docker so it does not interfere with other configurations in the same server.</pre><pre style="white-space:pre-wrap;color:rgb(0,0,0)">When I was doing my research at my University, I opted to give the user to use either the Ajenti, because it was a quick overview of your server / services that you were running. AND I wanted to have a configuration / overview control panel locally (That I was going to build in-house) so that you could have more advanced outlook on your server as well as local documentation, Hardware Install / Uninstall Wizard, and some other helpful stuff for the person. Because I figured that a small business didn't have a IT staff so it had to depend on ques from the software logs / messages and the documentation. But you could pretty much run the server from either both or one of them just fine...</pre><pre style="white-space:pre-wrap;color:rgb(0,0,0)">So those are my cases, hope this was some of help to you. :)</pre><pre style="white-space:pre-wrap;color:rgb(0,0,0)">John</pre></div>