November 2013 - cloud - Fedora mailing-lists

Short links to Fedora Cloud Images
by Matthew Miller 17 Dec '14

17 Dec '14

These links all work now: http://cloud.fedoraproject.org/fedora-19.x86_64.qcow2 http://cloud.fedoraproject.org/fedora-19.i386.qcow2 http://cloud.fedoraproject.org/fedora-latest.i386.qcow2 http://cloud.fedoraproject.org/fedora-latest.x86_64.qcow2 (They will redirect to a mirror link provided by mirrormanager.) -- Matthew Miller ☁☁☁ Fedora Cloud Architect ☁☁☁ <mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>

5 6

Vagrant in Fedora
by Alex Drahon 14 Jan '14

14 Jan '14

Hi all, I wanted to give an update on the status of Vagrant in Fedora 20, I just realised it's my first post to the list so I'll take this opportunity to introduce myself. I'm Alex, I work at Red Hat as a Solution Architect (ie. nothing engineering related), I wrote the vagrant-kvm plugin on my spare time to make it work on my Fedora laptop, though there's now a (much more qualified) second maintainer who is also providing support for Ubuntu through a PPA. Matthew asked me if I wanted to work on packaging Vagrant and the KVM plugin for Fedora 20, and I foolishly accepted ;) It's quite exhilarating having the opportunity to contribute to Fedora, and at the same time I feel totally lost. I don't mean this as a criticism, it's just this "first week at school" feeling, it will take me some time to get an idea of how things work. That said, here's the Vagrant situation: 1. I have a vagrant RPM that installs and works as expected, there's some minimal patching involved which has to do with the fact that Vagrant expect to be running in it's own Ruby 1.9.3 environment in /opt 2. There was also some patching involved to make the plugin system work, although I haven't tested plugins extensively (some stuff breaks like rubygems loading path) and providing common plugins as RPMs looks like the better way in Fedora. 3. I had to build my own rubygems-childprocess (current Fedora package is very old) and rubygems-log4r (not provided in Fedora) RPMs, but I don't know how I should submit them (package review ticket?). There's a existing ticket for log4r https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=905240 , I added it as a dependency to the Vagrant ticket. 4. I've packaged vagrant-kvm as a RPM and it installs, but I'm running into serious issues with Policykit. I don't think I'll be able to solve that without help, I'm not even sure what's the right way to do it. So, as a summary: - yum install vagrant should work, at which point you need to install VirtualBox and it will run as expected - vagrant-kvm installs but I don't know how to add the right polkit rules (I need help) Looks pretty good, right? Alex

5 34

Feedback: Cloud image F20 TC2
by Juerg Haefliger 10 Dec '13

10 Dec '13

All, I finally found the time to do some testing with the F20 image in HP Cloud Beta which runs some sort of OpenStack Havana. Here are my comments (which are obviously very OpenStack centric): Overall it looks very sound. Good job, Matt! As mentioned by others, logging could be improved. Currently, only kernel messages are written to the (serial) console log. If something goes wrong higher up in the stack (like cloud-init is unable to contact the metadata service or a crucial initrd process fails) we can't tell, unless there's access to the virtual console of the instance which not every cloud operator provides. If we reverse the 'console' options of the kernel command line, we get those messages on the serial console which helps with debugging boot issues. Also, I'm not sure how useful the 115200n8 ttyS0 option is, it's a virtual port after all. Lastly, Ubuntu uses console=tty1 instead of tty0 for reasons explained in https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cloud-init/+bug/1016695. I admit I do not fully understand the impact of using tty1 (first console) vs tty0 (foreground console) and neither do I think we need to blindly copy Ubuntu but they are the cloud-init guys after all and they do provide very solid OpenStack cloud images so it seems like they know what they're doing :-) Given that, my proposal is to use the following console kernel command line options: 'console=tty1 console=ttyS0' I was quite surprised to learn that the image can be enlarged to 2TB. Other images fail because the ext4 journal is too small. I haven't looked into it in detail but do you use special parameters when formatting the root partition? ...Juerg

6 6

Fedora.next Product Branding for Cloud
by Máirín Duffy 06 Dec '13

06 Dec '13

Hi folks, With the creation of 3 products for Fedora, the Fedora Design Team anticipates many new questions around Fedora's brand. As the main caretakers of the Fedora brand, we're going to have to figure these things out within the next few months. For example, the Design Team is starting to think about how to answer these types of questions: • Should each product have its own logo? or • Can you add our product to the Fedora website? or • Can you make our product its own website? (How should we represent these products on the website? Should we allow products to have their own separate websites?) To start off the rebranding discussion, the Fedora Design Team has 4 basic questions for each of the 3 product-focused working groups to answer: (1) What problem does your product solve, in one sentence? (2) Who is the target audience for your product, in one sentence? (3) List at least 5 products that successfully target the same target audience you are after. (4) List at least 5 products that try to solve the same problem. We are reaching out to each group individually to ask that you discuss these questions and come back to us with answers by Wednesday, December 4, 2013. I was hoping you could answer these questions for the cloud product; please let me know if this isn't a reasonable timeline or if you need any help coming up with the answers! Thanks, ~m

4 10

lifespan and lifecycle
by Matthew Miller 04 Dec '13

04 Dec '13

One of the general questions that's coming up across the working groups is product lifecycle. We should talk about what we would like to see for the Fedora cloud. I often hear that a longer lifecycle would be beneficial, and if Fedora as a whole goes for that I think we would take advantage, but more important, I think, is the ability to move to a newer version without hassle -- application stack works on one version and also on the next, or at least only requires minor changes. I also _really_ think we need to do periodic respins including updates, and we could possibly call these point releases. I think monthly would be ideal but every 3 months might be a more managable bite. -- Matthew Miller ☁☁☁ Fedora Cloud Architect ☁☁☁ <mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>

5 4

Fedora 20 TC3 AMIs
by Dennis Gilmore 02 Dec '13

02 Dec '13

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi all, Final TC3 images have been uploaded to EC2 and are available at ami-c17858a8 : us-east-1 image for i386 ami-6578580c : us-east-1 image for x86_64 additionally if your looking to the AMI's they have been added to files in the release tree http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/20-TC3/Images/i386/Fedora-Images-… http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/20-TC3/Images/x86_64/Fedora-Image… when we get to final and the images are uploaded to all regions they will all be listed and the file will be gpg signed in the final tree Dennis -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJSle5NAAoJEH7ltONmPFDRaV0P/2UVBWsA9MM3jStn05XGpYJT wkyWVP0P5IEq/KhjIADO627Hgrr899OF3GBGjtsWVB7xydAzwe+itjsgGDfFCi2B I5x5vIiBRVvKRnlsfudaqZgDY7/Dp5AR3nJf2g/cb+hUwh32AC9HRuhps9L6fk9J I35Ih8xcdUJtbU9E76M/BXZweXPgzDDgH9dInBZmyv/jC9K5bGqqHOQR8DHyOUop sWPeNjDwkq1cgLE/fXG+IIkYY0Bbi+TsYZTBs9Br2K/VChSXXIHk9PPITiUO6otL CLF1QDKYZROAu8sgZI/kcglkKPNE+cp6XdDe9nDqFyyhoSqBaBpxvFrGxeCvWfp+ paG38FpAzA9juI2QSw383hkSZbD9mAwto6GPImq6CMBW50GxbUjkROVDVPUJSBLO YZT5ennNdUm+v108f4r8CdAhtgA8fVzFVS9hmGTpNPchBTqqSI0ToPScCxYVSuFV iQtQZmQGQ/UDwP4VFmV9HSeJl2QQDaReW6nDs5tenF4yWFq2dJd8dQSm8tX+YHYc swF2jQOa63qBPE1pBLLzGMjUwXRfDHTR4pgUoBmpIQR16DKm2gYQC0OAKH6hMyPI Azdqb4YPufbTkQ/cuR02LYd0ZhQp2Ow5nH+mOwLu7917/IhOL6TxHkDUb/Mm61Fw SaBNyFqbxNeWBsRmZ7lh =TDwx -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 3

Minutes from today's (11/27/2013) cloud WG meeting
by Sam Kottler 27 Nov '13

27 Nov '13

Thanks everyone who was able to make it to the meeting today! For those who weren't able to make it, here are few important links: Minutes: http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2013-11-27/fedora-meeting… Minutes (text): http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2013-11-27/fedora-meeting… Log: http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2013-11-27/fedora-meeting… Log (text): http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2013-11-27/fedora-meeting… Here's a summary of the meeting (link to the HTML and text versions above): ========================================== #fedora-meeting-1: Cloud WG weekly meeting ========================================== Meeting started by samkottler at 17:00:23 UTC. The full logs are available at http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2013-11-27/fedora-meeting… . Meeting summary --------------- * rollcall (samkottler, 17:00:37) * LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/cloud/ticket/4 (mattdm, 17:04:18) * update on GCE legal and packaging things (samkottler, 17:05:03) * email shk(a)redhat.com if you want to get added to the trusted testers program or want to see the language associated with it (samkottler, 17:05:58) * LINK: http://fedorapeople.org/cgit/skottler/public_git/google-compute-engine-pack… (samkottler, 17:06:59) * Fedora.next product branding (samkottler, 17:16:33) * LINK: http://cloud-images.ubuntu.com/locator/ec2/ (jzb, 17:30:52) * LINK: https://aws.amazon.com/marketplace (jzb, 17:31:23) * AGREED: we'll produce a base image, with tools, and 2-4 images preconfigured for specific uses (samkottler, 17:43:44) * put together a team/plan to work on the PRD (samkottler, 17:53:38) * LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Cloud_PRD (samkottler, 17:54:17) * open floor (samkottler, 18:02:49) * LINK: https://fedoraserver-wgblog.rhcloud.com/fedora-server-working-group-nov-26-… is a good write-up of that meeting (sgallagh, 18:07:03) Meeting ended at 18:23:52 UTC. Action Items ------------ Action Items, by person ----------------------- * **UNASSIGNED** * (none) People Present (lines said) --------------------------- * samkottler (103) * jzb (52) * mattdm (49) * number80 (38) * frankieonuonga (29) * mrunge (27) * gholms (26) * rbergeron (25) * sgallagh (17) * geppetto (10) * juergh (8) * zodbot (5) 17:00:23 <samkottler> #startmeeting Cloud WG weekly meeting 17:00:23 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed Nov 27 17:00:23 2013 UTC. The chair is samkottler. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 17:00:23 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 17:00:37 <samkottler> #topic rollcall 17:00:42 * geppetto is here 17:00:44 <samkottler> \o 17:00:50 <rbergeron> heyooooo 17:00:59 <mrunge> heya! 17:00:59 <juergh> hi all 17:01:01 <samkottler> #chair geppetto mrunge number80 rbergeron mattdm frankieonuonga 17:01:01 <zodbot> Current chairs: frankieonuonga geppetto mattdm mrunge number80 rbergeron samkottler 17:01:27 <jzb> howdy 17:01:32 <samkottler> #chair jzb 17:01:32 <zodbot> Current chairs: frankieonuonga geppetto jzb mattdm mrunge number80 rbergeron samkottler 17:01:35 <mattdm> hi just a sec wrapping up Current Exciting Crisis 17:01:42 <gholms> Heh 17:03:49 * samkottler waits another minute for mattdm 17:03:58 <samkottler> we have a lot more people today than I was expecting :) 17:04:18 <mattdm> https://fedorahosted.org/cloud/ticket/4 17:04:27 <mattdm> just fyi :) 17:04:39 <rbergeron> samkottler: you haven't scared everyone off yet 17:04:47 <rbergeron> give it another minute or two :) 17:04:50 <samkottler> *yet* 17:05:03 <samkottler> #topic update on GCE legal and packaging things 17:05:26 <samkottler> so Fedora legal has said that people who wish to sign the google trusted tester document may do so individually 17:05:58 <samkottler> #info email shk(a)redhat.com if you want to get added to the trusted testers program or want to see the language associated with it 17:06:33 <number80> great 17:06:43 <samkottler> frankieonuonga, witlessb, and I started packaging the utlities we'll need 17:06:59 <samkottler> http://fedorapeople.org/cgit/skottler/public_git/google-compute-engine-pack… 17:07:15 <samkottler> help would be much appreciated 17:07:18 <samkottler> commit for everyone! 17:08:02 <mattdm> samkottler awesome thanks 17:08:06 <gholms> Great! How does that help us? 17:08:21 <mattdm> gholms fedora available in more public clouds 17:08:29 <samkottler> gholms: we'll need those tools to make fedora available in gce 17:08:35 <gholms> Wo's going to upload it? 17:08:42 <gholms> *Who's 17:08:54 <number80> samkottler: i could help 17:08:57 <gholms> Not rel-eng, I presume? 17:09:01 <mattdm> gholms eventually, release engineering. once we have it working. 17:09:13 <mattdm> rel-eng uploads ec2, and this is the same. 17:09:23 <gholms> I thought dgilmore wasn't going to do that. 17:09:50 <mattdm> gholms it could be someone working with him. dgilmore doesn't need more things piled on top of him, that's true. 17:09:50 <gholms> (the agreement thing, that is) 17:09:54 <number80> gholms: dgilmore needs moarr people to help him, so we need to get some people to join rel-eng 17:10:05 <gholms> Alrighty 17:10:10 <samkottler> frankieonuonga agreed to be the rel-eng rep a while back 17:10:18 <jzb> number80: what does that entail? 17:10:41 <samkottler> jzb: it'd mainly be scripting stuff to upload to public clouds 17:10:45 <samkottler> tools > humans 17:10:47 <gholms> I'm not trying to stop you or anything; I just want to have a clear picture. 17:11:31 <number80> jzb: plus improving general rel-eng process with more automation 17:11:43 <mattdm> yeah there is a plan to have image uploading be automatic. 17:11:50 <samkottler> it's also possible we could get dgilmore access without signing the document, but that's a whole other discussion 17:13:03 <number80> i'd say no, as it would force someone else to step up into rel-eng 17:13:30 <samkottler> well we should have someone else doing it regardless, but I was just putting that out on the table 17:15:15 <mrunge> esp. when thinking about release cycles, I'd love to see more automation 17:15:37 <rbergeron> automate all the things! 17:15:45 * rbergeron uses overused phrase 17:15:46 <samkottler> #topic +1 17:15:53 <samkottler> #undo 17:15:53 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Topic object at 0x4c516d0> 17:15:55 <samkottler> +1 17:15:57 * rbergeron lulz 17:16:01 <gholms> Heh 17:16:02 <geppetto> :) 17:16:33 <samkottler> #topic Fedora.next product branding 17:16:35 <samkottler> :) 17:17:06 <samkottler> did people get a chance to read the thread on the list? 17:17:17 <mattdm> Yeah -- didn't respond but read it. 17:17:54 <jzb> I threw something out as a starter, I got one reply and I think we were largely saying the same things but slightly differently. 17:18:00 <mattdm> Are we generally in agreement with 17:18:02 <mattdm> Fedora Cloud provides a customizable base image and tools for developing 17:18:04 <mattdm> scale out applications on public and private clouds. 17:18:11 <mattdm> as our overall product? 17:18:14 <number80> yup 17:18:54 <number80> i wished that we added an emphasis on the devops side, but it's only a wording issue 17:19:11 <samkottler> the devops side in what respect? 17:19:18 <samkottler> ephemeralization of infrastructure? 17:19:43 <mattdm> I can get on board with that, although I'm also open to the idea of picking something more specific for the application scale-out approach and focusing around that 17:20:01 <mattdm> eg openshift and/or docker. 17:20:51 <samkottler> I think one thing that ubuntu has done really well in the cloud space is make their stuff extremely general purpose 17:21:06 <juergh> samkottler: +1 17:21:08 <number80> samkottler: not sure, i'm understanding that expression 17:21:31 <mattdm> whereas on the other hand, coreos goes the other way and basically comes batteries-included for a specific purpose. 17:22:01 <number80> It's more about providing tools from end to end of the process: the developer, the operator should use the same image 17:22:04 <mattdm> If I am alone in this, then we can just move on, because I think we can also do general purpose in a very succesful way. 17:22:10 <samkottler> number80: the ubuntu images can run docker, be ephemeral with the latest stuff, are a nice openstack guest standalone, etc. 17:22:20 <number80> samkottler: so we agree ;) 17:22:36 <samkottler> number80: yep, totally 17:23:35 <mattdm> overall, there's a tension between being able to do all of the things and being tailored to do one well. For example, normally one wouldn't want libvirt on a guest image, but that infrastructure will be necessary for selinux-protected docker, so we will want it for that... 17:23:53 <samkottler> mattdm: I don't mind aligning ourselves with certain other projects, but I thnink it's challenging to provide general, widespread value if we do 17:24:01 <mattdm> but it's a _big_ thing to add, so should probably be on the image itself for docker use, rather than installed with cloud-init or otherwise. 17:24:41 <samkottler> I almost feels like we need spins, but for cloud images 17:25:02 <mattdm> samkottler "library of cloud images". yes. 17:25:05 * rbergeron nods 17:25:15 <gholms> Thankfully lots of clouds make image customization a snap, too. 17:25:23 <jzb> samkottler: +1 17:26:29 <samkottler> so then we can produce a base, small image 17:26:36 <samkottler> and other stuff with the "value add" baked in 17:26:49 <samkottler> if you need a multi-tenant docker env, we've got that 17:26:50 <samkottler> etc. 17:26:57 <mrunge> well, I assume, that will confuse users to have a broad library of cloud images 17:27:16 <mrunge> so I'm -1 for (against) specialized images 17:27:27 <number80> the same 17:27:41 <samkottler> confuse users in what way? 17:27:45 <jzb> mrunge: they expect that, especially on AWS 17:27:45 <samkottler> they won't know which one to use? 17:27:57 <number80> i'd rather make it easy to build custom images and have a very bare one 17:28:15 <jzb> number80: we would, but also easy to use off-the-shelf images for specific things. 17:28:16 <mrunge> yeah, or if they see a list of 20 images, what do they do? 17:28:31 <mattdm> jzb +1 to off-the-shelf. 17:28:37 <jzb> mrunge: they pick the one that has the description that matches what they want 17:28:55 <mrunge> jzb, who reads docs? 17:28:55 <jzb> mrunge: this is not uniformed desktop users, this is developers who should be capable of reading a description and picking. 17:29:06 * gholms notes that we had this exact argument with the old spin download page 17:29:14 <samkottler> how many users are able to respin their own images without learning a significant amount of stuff 17:29:18 <jzb> mrunge: the people who choose from umpty-billion different AWS images based on Ubuntu? 17:29:23 <samkottler> remember that we're engineering for the 99% here :) 17:29:27 <gholms> samkottler: In AWS, all of them. 17:29:30 <samkottler> not the people who are in a working group :) 17:29:32 <gholms> Not sure about others. 17:29:40 <number80> jzb: from experience, specialized images always ends up with a lot of unused stuff for 90% of users 17:29:42 <geppetto> I think both extremes will be a bad idea â€¦ you don't want N people all "customizing" the same base into roughly the same baked in image. 17:29:48 <samkottler> gholms: that's not really true, though 17:29:53 <juergh> what about the effort to maintain a whole set of image vs. a bare image and some tools to customize it? 17:30:07 <samkottler> juergh: yep, that's basically what's being proposed 17:30:10 <juergh> think security updates and the likes. 17:30:12 <geppetto> Also the customizing can't be bugfree â€¦ which is a giant negative freeroll. 17:30:13 <samkottler> we'll keep the base image around 17:30:22 <jzb> number80: from experience with... images running in the cloud? 17:30:23 <samkottler> geppetto: mhm 17:30:50 <jzb> number80: this is our "competition" 17:30:51 <samkottler> number80: if the people don't need the stuff on top, then they just use the base image 17:30:52 <jzb> http://cloud-images.ubuntu.com/locator/ec2/ 17:31:23 <jzb> https://aws.amazon.com/marketplace 17:31:27 <number80> jzb: yup, at $dayjob, i'm doing a lot of SaaS migration :/ 17:31:31 <mattdm> So, thinking of the docker use case (just because that's what I'm working with), it's really awesome if there is a pre-made image that I can just launch or download+launch. 17:31:38 * mrunge needs to step out and will come back later 17:31:49 <number80> samkottler: +1 17:32:11 <mattdm> jzb but the cloud-images-locator is just the same as http://fedoraproject.org/en/get-fedora-options#clouds 17:32:36 <juergh> In my experience partners take a bare image, customize it, snapshot it and make that image available to their end users. There's alway some customization necesseray whether you start from a bare image or a specialized iamge. 17:32:59 <juergh> I'm not sold on customized images. 17:33:00 <geppetto> jzb: Is it obvious to other people how all those top 8 entries are different from each other? 17:33:05 <gholms> samkottler: You'vr seen how ridiculously easy EC2's console makes customizing an image, right? 17:33:17 <jzb> mattdm: similar, but my point is that people are capable of navigating things 17:33:41 <mattdm> gholms ridiculous in what sense? :) 17:34:07 <jzb> geppetto: I would hope if someone is doing app development and making some form of informed decision they are capable of reading a description and choosing. 17:34:19 <jzb> geppetto: also, this should not be a bare "the only thing they have is this page" situation 17:34:25 <samkottler> gholms: I wouldn't exactly say that 17:34:33 <jzb> geppetto: once we have soome customized images, we should be promoting them 17:34:34 <samkottler> most people don't build their own AMI's 17:34:54 <gholms> mattdm: Easy enough that I've got people from developers to graphic designers who figured it out on their own. ;) 17:34:56 <jzb> geppetto: e.g. "hey, wanna run docker on Fedora, use <link>" 17:35:16 <gholms> samkottler: From scratch, of course not. But customizi a base image is another story. 17:35:27 <jzb> geppetto: I think we'll put ourselves at a disadvantage having only a base image without any additional value-add images. 17:35:32 <samkottler> again, let's think about actual users 17:35:37 <samkottler> not us, but actual people :) 17:35:38 <jzb> though we should point loudly to the default 17:35:42 <geppetto> jzb: Sure. 17:35:45 <jzb> samkottler: hey, I think. 17:35:55 * jzb thought he was an actual people. 17:36:11 <number80> jzb: for our target, the barest image is itself a value 17:36:16 <gholms> samkottler: I really wish I could show you my data on this. :( 17:36:20 <mattdm> My viewpoint is that we have a pretty decent generic base image right now, and it's not getting very much traction. 17:36:21 * gholms cries 17:36:44 <gholms> mattdm: You know, that's a good point. 17:36:44 <jzb> mattdm: +1 17:36:46 <samkottler> gholms: I don't doubt that it's true, my point is that there are a lot of people who want to use an image without having to "rebake" it 17:37:04 <number80> mattdm: we lacks maintained application stacks :( 17:37:05 <gholms> samkottler: Makes sense 17:37:20 <mattdm> number80 +1 yes. 17:37:27 <number80> i'd rather rely on easily installable SCL than a bunch of images 17:37:41 <samkottler> telling users 'here, launch this AMI and you'll have docker/openshift/whatever' is huge 17:37:55 * gholms nods 17:38:01 <jzb> number80: let me see if I'm understanding this 17:38:05 <frankieonuonga> i am in guys 17:38:08 <frankieonuonga> sorry i am late 17:38:09 <mattdm> what if we kept the library small? three or four things in addition to the base, rather than 20? 17:38:13 <jzb> number80: you feel that offering 20 images is confusing 17:38:22 <jzb> number80: but offering one + shuttling them off to SCLs is not? 17:38:22 <number80> samkottler: we could add a script in user-data for that 17:38:29 <samkottler> 20 images is also insane to test 17:38:38 <samkottler> < 5 is perfect IMO 17:38:47 <number80> jzb: a base image and users are free to install any SCL they need 17:39:03 <jzb> number80: again, that's less confusing than offering it pre-baked? 17:39:07 <geppetto> samkottler: +1 â€¦ extremes of both cases will be pretty bad, IMO. 17:39:13 <jzb> when I can just spin up an Ubuntu image that has what I want? 17:39:43 <mattdm> so, proposal: base image, plus tools for extending (including application stack work), plus 2-4 images preconfigured for specific uses. 17:39:49 <samkottler> mattdm: +1 17:39:49 <jzb> geppetto, samkottler I am in agreement that 20 may be a bit much 17:39:56 <geppetto> mattdm: +1 17:40:00 <jzb> maybe 4 or 5 would be the ideal situation 17:40:26 <jzb> and if we start getting traction, perhaps the larger community will start building + offering more. 17:40:30 <gholms> Not to mention we'd have a lot easier time maintaining and testing just a few images. 17:40:33 <number80> jzb: yes, most of the time, your image will require frying anyway 17:40:43 <number80> n images = n times more QA 17:40:53 * rbergeron thinks there is a healthy balance between gholms's thoughts and samkottler's 17:41:17 <gholms> What if we start with just a few and see where that takes us? 17:41:21 <jzb> so, mattdm's proposal: ^^ 17:41:27 <geppetto> jzb: My guess is that it'd be a mistake to go above ~7 pre. baked images (roughly what people can remember, easily) 17:41:34 <samkottler> yeah, a few seems perfect for now 17:41:35 <frankieonuonga> i am +1 on gholms idea 17:41:40 <jzb> "base image, plus tools, plus 2-4 images preconfiguted for specific uses" 17:41:40 * rbergeron is also pretty sure that the number of folks that take a base image and then snapshot it after updating it in their own way is pretty large 17:41:48 <number80> if we have people to help maintaining more images, why not, but the main goal of fedora.next is to reduce the scope to get better products 17:41:54 <samkottler> if people like them then we can consider making more 17:41:55 <juergh> rbergeron: exactly 17:42:06 <geppetto> If everyone could stop re-proposing what mattdm said, and just +1 that'd be nice ;) 17:42:08 <number80> samkottler: +1 17:42:14 <jzb> so I'm +1 to mattdm / gholms 17:42:25 <jzb> geppetto: +1 17:42:35 * rbergeron just +1s the last 12 things said :) 17:42:37 <juergh> who/what's do decide what those additional images contain? 17:42:37 <frankieonuonga> i have already voted but just to clarigy gholms +1 17:42:48 * jzb +1's rbergeron 17:42:59 <jzb> (I think we have consensus) 17:43:18 * gholms +1s jzb just because :P 17:43:28 <mattdm> juergh all of us, and depending on who wants to work on what. 17:43:44 <samkottler> #agreed we'll produce a base image, with tools, and 2-4 images preconfigured for specific uses 17:43:49 * samkottler is excited about this 17:44:35 <mrunge> yeah, sounds good to me, the fewer, the better 17:45:06 <rbergeron> well - the worst that can happen is that we can find out that they're all wildly popular 17:45:21 <rbergeron> or that we were wrong about he popularity of one or another and ... figure out how to tune it / make it better / drop it 17:45:27 <rbergeron> learning ftw :) 17:45:42 <samkottler> agreed 17:45:56 <mattdm> rbergeron yes. and we need better metrics. we do not really have those right now. that might be a whole 'nuther issue. 17:46:06 <samkottler> next we need to figure out which ones we'll produce, but we can take that to the list 17:46:19 <number80> i suggest polls 17:46:24 * samkottler has a feeling some people will have opinions about that 17:47:07 <number80> i'd rather go ask actual users than relying on how own distorted perception :o) 17:47:13 <number80> well, mine is distorted 17:47:24 <samkottler> number80: well before we can poll we need some options, but yeah an end-user poll would be great 17:47:25 <mattdm> good polls are hard / expensive. 17:47:47 <frankieonuonga> totally agree with number80 but my only problem is how do we gather pols..do we let people vote as they download an image ? 17:47:48 <samkottler> also, remember that most of our target users currently aren't in the community :) 17:47:57 <mattdm> but could we bracket that for now and come back to it? there's more agenda to get through :) 17:48:03 <jzb> mattdm: +1 17:48:07 <frankieonuonga> mattdm: we could poll on the site and collect results on mysql 17:48:09 <mrunge> +1 17:48:12 <mattdm> the topic right now was product branding 17:48:15 <number80> +1 17:48:26 <mattdm> And this question was the big part of that that I felt was open 17:48:42 <mattdm> other than that, I think jzb's initial response was good except I would s/Docker/CoreOS/g 17:48:46 <samkottler> yeah, the PRD and branding docs will be much easier now 17:49:41 <jzb> mattdm: can we +CoreOS? 17:49:42 <samkottler> so should we take the branding document back to the list and move on? 17:49:56 <jzb> but I'm easy, s/Docker/CoreOS/g works too 17:50:24 <rbergeron> isn't coreOS like a ... whole different nut to crack from docker 17:51:10 <mattdm> Fedora happily includes Docker. CoreOS is a platform for Docker deployment + some other stuff, which is basically directly in competition. 17:51:19 <mattdm> friendly, open source competition :) 17:51:42 <number80> may the best win 17:52:04 <jzb> as long as it's us 17:52:08 <jzb> :-) 17:52:12 <frankieonuonga> :-) 17:53:09 * rbergeron looks back to samkottler's branding document question 17:53:24 <mattdm> yeah, +1 to back to the list and next item 17:53:38 <samkottler> #topic put together a team/plan to work on the PRD 17:54:03 <frankieonuonga> just as a reminder...what was PRD again ? 17:54:09 * rbergeron poked away some lsat week. 17:54:17 <samkottler> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Cloud_PRD 17:54:33 * samkottler is planning on working on it on friday and maybe tomorrow depending on how bored he gets 17:54:35 <rbergeron> but slowly. and having help would be teh awesomes so i am not feeling sad and lonely and wondering if i'm doing the right thing :) 17:55:13 * frankieonuonga offers to help samkottler 17:55:17 <jzb> rbergeron: will try to poke at it more this weekend 17:55:29 <jzb> rbergeron: will be doing the traditional gorging tomorrow and Friday 17:55:40 <rbergeron> jzb: TURKEEEEEEE 17:55:43 <samkottler> remember that we agreed to try and get it done by december 15th 17:55:47 <samkottler> which is kinda soon 17:56:02 <samkottler> rbergeron: don't remind me 17:56:04 <number80> rbergeron: i did some proof-reading this afternoon, and i plan to import openstack personas so we could grok our own personas 17:56:24 <frankieonuonga> we use cloud stack where i work so i can do that 17:56:39 <jzb> frankieonuonga: +1 17:56:47 * jzb says, wearing CloudStack PMC hat. 17:56:52 <samkottler> do we want individual personas for each private cloud impl? 17:57:06 <rbergeron> number80: cool, thanks 17:57:12 <rbergeron> samkottler: yeah. it's very soon :) 17:57:28 <number80> jzb: i prefer my yellow shiny eucalyptus t-shirt :P 17:57:37 <rbergeron> frankieonuonga: you just made jzb and ke4qqq smile, lol 17:57:46 <rbergeron> number80: that's because it's an epic shirt 17:57:51 <number80> \o/ 17:57:53 <rbergeron> samkottler: impl? 17:57:56 <frankieonuonga> :-) always a pleasure to ...plus ke4qqq is a huge help 17:58:03 <rbergeron> sorry, my head isn't right 17:58:08 <frankieonuonga> thanks mate 17:58:22 <jzb> samkottler: probably 17:58:58 <frankieonuonga> I would say 2 people in each 17:58:58 <number80> sorry, let's focus 17:59:04 <frankieonuonga> if possible 17:59:44 <samkottler> the PRD is just the kind of thing that requires hammering away on 17:59:44 <number80> (besides fesco meeting in one minute) 18:00:01 <number80> samkottler: +1 18:00:09 <samkottler> anyone have anything else to add on the PRD? 18:00:32 <samkottler> rbergeron: implementation 18:00:39 <rbergeron> samkottler: AHHHH 18:01:47 <samkottler> can we bump the release/lifecycle discussion to next week? 18:01:58 <number80> +1 18:02:02 <mrunge> +1 18:02:05 <mattdm> samkottler yes that's fine.. 18:02:08 <jzb> samkottler: maybe start on email? 18:02:08 <frankieonuonga> +1 18:02:10 <jzb> but +1 18:02:10 * mattdm has fesco meeting now 18:02:11 <number80> maybe kickstarting the discussion on the list 18:02:21 <samkottler> mattdm: can you kick that off on the list? 18:02:28 <mattdm> samkottler yep 18:02:41 <samkottler> mattdm: danke! 18:02:49 <samkottler> #topic open floor 18:03:09 <samkottler> anyone got anything else before we wrap up? 18:03:14 <frankieonuonga> yes 18:03:14 <sgallagh> Dangerous topic: dividing line of Server and Cloud? (Sorry if this was discussed earlier, just got here) 18:03:34 <frankieonuonga> I will wait for sgallagh to finish then i come in with mine 18:03:41 <mrunge> oh yes, good question 18:04:53 <mrunge> and sgallagh IMHO we had that very briefly on the cloud-ml, but didn't come to any conclusion 18:05:00 <frankieonuonga> I want to ask if we have some docs for the server side to find out what their limit is 18:05:02 <sgallagh> So it came up on yesterday's call that it's somewhat ambiguous 18:05:08 <mattdm> It's looking to me that there is going to be some overlap 18:05:12 <sgallagh> s/call/meeting/ 18:05:15 <mattdm> which is not necessarily bad. 18:05:17 <sgallagh> As there should be 18:05:23 <sgallagh> But how much? 18:05:59 <frankieonuonga> I personally think that we need to go in a few months before we know exactly what is happening 18:06:05 <frankieonuonga> but that is just me 18:06:20 <samkottler> sgallagh: it seems like we need to establish where we have the potential to overlap before we can figure out how much overlap is okay? 18:06:41 <mattdm> possibly a lot, at the core level. We're also going to focus on prebaked images for things like docker and openshift 18:06:45 <sgallagh> samkottler: We covered that somewhat in our Server WG meeting yesterday. 18:07:02 <samkottler> sgallagh: I'll re-read the log then, thanks 18:07:03 <sgallagh> https://fedoraserver-wgblog.rhcloud.com/fedora-server-working-group-nov-26-… is a good write-up of that meeting 18:07:10 <mattdm> also, I think that we will be somewhat concerned more with _language_ stacks and server maybe more with _application_ stacks? 18:07:12 * samkottler will make a point of attending those meetings 18:07:36 * frankieonuonga is lost but will figure it out 18:07:52 <sgallagh> mattdm: We're focusing our intentions pretty heavily around the ability to assign "roles" to a server 18:07:57 * number80 gotta go (office building is closing) 18:08:13 <sgallagh> At a high level "i.e. This machine is a domain controller", "This machine is a PostgreSQL server" 18:09:13 <frankieonuonga> by the way guys I am sorry . I know I had promised the packages for about 1 week ago but I have been badly busy at work. anyway happy to say that Samkottler has been a great help so i should be able to finish by end week. sorry again 18:09:43 <mrunge> and how fits e.g oVirt in this figure? 18:10:10 <mrunge> server based on small images 18:10:47 <mrunge> so, somehow oVirt is a classical data-center product 18:10:52 <mrunge> == a server product 18:11:24 <mrunge> but on one side totally based on small images (for compute nodes) 18:11:33 <mattdm> ovirt node vs. ovirt [whatever the not-node-part-is-called] 18:11:54 <mattdm> sgallagh Another differentiator might be image-based deployment vs. kickstart deployment. 18:11:55 * samkottler likes the idea of operating under the premise that server owns the hypervisor and we own the guest 18:12:05 <jzb> samkottler: +1 18:12:18 <frankieonuonga> +1 samkottler 18:12:30 <mrunge> samkottler, in the oVirt case, we would own both 18:12:40 <mrunge> and the same applies to server WG 18:12:42 <mattdm> who owns 'postgresql server' in that model? 18:12:51 <sgallagh> mattdm: I'm not sure if that differentiates the products really 18:13:13 <sgallagh> (Referring to kickstart vs. image) 18:13:26 <sgallagh> To me, the product is the result of that action 18:13:32 <samkottler> mrunge: no in the ovirt case we'd own neither 18:13:59 <samkottler> mattdm: the server WG would own the things that aren't cloud related 18:14:20 <samkottler> so we could own cloud-init, virtio stuff (maybe?) and they would own all the 'regular' packages 18:14:31 <frankieonuonga> i beg to differ...to some extent i think that our images in some cases are used as servers. 18:14:37 <gholms> Seems reasonable 18:14:38 <frankieonuonga> but i might be wrong 18:15:00 <sgallagh> samkottler: I generally agree on the hypervisor vs. guest thing 18:15:09 <sgallagh> Except of course for the tenancy case... 18:16:00 <sgallagh> i.e. virt-on-virt 18:16:22 <jzb> sgallagh: virt-on-virt? 18:16:34 <samkottler> frankieonuonga: oh yeah of course, we're mainly talking about where the server WG's role ends and ours begins 18:16:41 <samkottler> and I guess then where theirs starts again 18:16:44 <sgallagh> jzb: I set up a virtualized cloud and then rent you the ability to do virt inside my cloud 18:16:54 <samkottler> jzb: russia doll virt 18:16:58 <samkottler> russian doll** 18:17:11 <mrunge> jzb, e.g the undercloud-overcloud thing in OpenStack 18:17:19 <mrunge> jzb, named TripleO 18:17:32 <sgallagh> where virt may be one or more of "kvm, xen, lxc, docker..." 18:17:59 <samkottler> sgallagh: so basically you'd own the 'lowest' hypervisor 18:18:01 <jzb> ah 18:18:10 <mrunge> I'm not sure, if we can divide them at all 18:18:17 <samkottler> mrunge: tripleo is a whole other thing from russian doll virt 18:18:25 <mrunge> (I mean server and cloud) 18:19:13 <mrunge> samkottler, I don't think so. 18:19:31 <mrunge> nevertheless, this is nothing we can decide right now 18:19:49 <samkottler> mrunge: tripleo is using openstack to provision physical hardware 18:19:55 <samkottler> mrunge: and then install a hypervisor on top 18:20:17 <samkottler> vs. virtualizing on top of a hypervisor and then using that hypervisor to run another guest inside of it 18:21:21 <mrunge> samkottler, it's not necessarily the case 18:21:30 <samkottler> do we actually want to vote on something related to this? 18:21:32 <mrunge> but usually folks will implement it that way 18:22:35 <samkottler> frankieonuonga: you had something to bring up? 18:22:41 <frankieonuonga> yeah 18:22:55 <frankieonuonga> I am sorry . I know I had promised the packages for about 1 week ago but I have been badly busy at work. anyway happy to say that Samkottler has been a great help so i should be able to finish by end week. sorry again 18:23:17 <frankieonuonga> i thought it might be easier but there are some things i had over looked 18:23:21 <frankieonuonga> so i am doing what i can 18:23:40 <samkottler> no worries - let us know where/when you need help :) 18:23:52 <samkottler> #endmeeting

1 0

Reminder + topics for tomorrow's (11/27/2013) cloud WG meeting
by Sam Kottler 27 Nov '13

27 Nov '13

Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the cloud WG meeting Wednesday at 17:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on irc.freenode.net. I know tomorrow is a busy travel day in the US due to the Thanksgiving holiday on Thursday, but hopefully we'll have a solid group in attendance. Additionally, we're working on finding a better time going forward, but the meeting tomorrow is still at 17:00 UTC. To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto or run: date -d '2013-11-27 17:00 UTC' = Followups = * GCE legal and packaging updates * Fedora.next product branding * Put together a team/plan to work on the PRD = New business = No new agenda items, but please bring up any topics you've got. If you would like to add something to this agenda, you can reply to this e-mail, file a new ticket at https://fedorahosted.org/cloud, e-mail me directly, or bring it up at the end of the meeting during the open floor. I'll talk to you all tomorrow! -Sam

3 2

Reminder + topics for tomorrow's (11/20/2013) cloud WG meeting
by Sam Kottler 26 Nov '13

26 Nov '13

Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the cloud WG meeting Wednesday at 17:00UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on irc.freenode.net. To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto or run: date -d '2013-11-13 17:00 UTC' = Followups = * Update on the status of packaging the tools needed to build images for GCE * Status of legal discussion around Google's trusted tester document = New business = * Fedora.next product branding for cloud (https://fedorahosted.org/cloud/ticket/3) If you would like to add something to this agenda, you can reply to this e-mail, file a new ticket at https://fedorahosted.org/cloud, e-mail me directly, or bring it up at the end of the meeting, during the open floor. See you all tomorrow at 17:00 UTC! -Sam

4 6

cloud-initramfs-tools update for F20
by Juerg Haefliger 22 Nov '13

22 Nov '13

All, I realize it's late in the cycle but I just pushed an update to cloud-initramfs-tools: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/cloud-initramfs-tools-0.20-2.fc20 The package contains fixes for: 1003153 - dracut growroot module leaves an empty directory around which breaks dracut 1016648 - ARM guest on x86_64 fails to boot, mount: special device /dev/vda3 does not exist 1009172 - dracut-modules-growroot does not enlarge /dev/mmcblk0 Karma is always welcome :-) Regards ...juerg

1 0

Fedora 20 TC2 AMIs
by Dennis Gilmore 22 Nov '13

22 Nov '13

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi all, Final TC2 images have been uploaded to EC2 and are available at ami-3392b55a : us-east-1 image for i386 ami-f794b39e : us-east-1 image for x86_64 additionally if your looking to the AMI's they have been added to files in the release tree http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/20-TC2/Images/i386/Fedora-Images-… http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/20-TC2/Images/x86_64/Fedora-Image… when we get to final and the images are uploaded to all regions they will all be listed and the file will be gpg signed in the final tree Dennis -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJSjZC/AAoJEH7ltONmPFDREnQP/2y5fb33v+9yBxJ6pq0waKN1 KNOTAebB0dRkM5FAZJ70RqywQgwwrvPf77MM61cXto07mjm7/ZCyZ8gnVIyHAftd RzmTALL2sbTVapubGnN1klheXfTrR30Ht7GD5XiNicuJ/4MQ/akW1TJoRbqbOnpB YoP6mY8c+3TDMrETSc18GRS303nzHTsrmHygDlswBdkkSj9kGv5dRqwU7zE0uSUn QJm373KrlxEiWiLKmYJJXbsr3QrcHJ7EBG/vGvo+wux+tywx34+gAdgFDhcV2Q/0 YLz4S112gTqoDMWQM6f2/nmqeGZSonl+fRrxH/oJIp25khA0GhTmVke+ztmfODHT 95i1Xx6VuHNYcRFUkblkVsOkwAIFVch2ISLqNw5kLK64ti1A8vkgjVmMesuVbJNf JrMkU/CcwyCMD0gC1w/ReQDMU5VIdiIGyovV2V+jolQq28UL8TgQnd9xc51ZO28i IIHUOoboyDqCXbIcqTDCiWhuYjdqcAO9JcX7WvoQr6hWawgDmRtVtC4CCbZusSyL 13oK4xfienacnVVPGhcDOJ2wsSCbN0qmByx1HcKatkgw7g/likYhUe5INBVSu+2F lrJ8SUs3C31gu4uIeHRx7+79hI3d3naqAYI9KeSMWco2EoSOkhO0+KTco53IcEJV 7B+7SemC2u4zvWLFU8uH =uaFs -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

4 5

Proposed update, F20 cloud-init to 0.7.4 release
by Steven Hardy 21 Nov '13

21 Nov '13

Hi all, I've built and lightly tested an updated cloud-init package for F19/20: http://shardy.fedorapeople.org/cloud-init/cloud-init-0.7.4-1.fc19.noarch.rpm http://shardy.fedorapeople.org/cloud-init/cloud-init-0.7.4-1.fc19.src.rpm The 0.7.4 release includes a number of worthwhile bugfixes, which would be good to include in Fedora. I tested using the latest cloud image (F20-x86_64-TC2-20131120.qcow2), updated with this package, and two dependent packages (python-jsonpatch and python-jsonpointer). The jsonpatch/jsonpointer packages are available in the main repo for F20 and in updates for F19. Thanks, Steve

2 1

The cloud images should log more on the serial console
by Attila Fazekas 21 Nov '13

21 Nov '13

Hi all, I have noticed two nits related to the console logging of the cloud images, and on other related to the cfn-tools. - When I boot up the f20 cloud image in openstack the log messages from the cloud-init is printed to the vnc console, but not visible on the serial console. It also messes up the login prompt on the vnc console. In this case the serial console logging is more practical in my opinion. For example If you need to troubleshoot metadata passing+login issues, parsing the serial console output is easier than OCR-ing on the vnc/spcie console. - The kick-start should log the %post related issues to the serial console, a macro argument like --log=/dev/console might be helpful, especially if you build the images inside openstack. - AFAIK the /usr/bin/cfn-create-aws-symlinks should be called as part of the image build process in order to create the symbolic links in the /opt/aws/bin/. Best Regards, Attila PS.: Now the rootfs is resize is working :) I will try to run devstack on the f20 images soon.

2 1

Minutes from today's (11/20/2013) cloud WG meeting
by Sam Kottler 20 Nov '13

20 Nov '13

Thanks everyone who was able to make it to the meeting today! It seems like meeting at 17:00 UTC is tough for some people so we'll work on finding a better time going forward. For those who weren't able to make it, here are few important links: Minutes: http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2013-11-20/fedora-meeting… Minutes (text): http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2013-11-20/fedora-meeting… Log: http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2013-11-20/fedora-meeting… Log (text): http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2013-11-20/fedora-meeting… Here's a summary of the meeting (link to the HTML and text versions above): ========================================== #fedora-meeting-1: Cloud WG weekly meeting ========================================== Meeting started by samkottler at 17:00:18 UTC. The full logs are available at http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2013-11-20/fedora-meeting… . Meeting summary --------------- * rollcall (samkottler, 17:01:08) * Google compute (samkottler, 17:06:23) * ACTION: mattdm to ping google about gce cloud-init patch upstream (mattdm, 17:09:06) * LINK: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/legal/2013-November/002304.html (samkottler, 17:12:33) * marketing/design document (samkottler, 17:16:35) * LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/cloud/ticket/3 (samkottler, 17:17:29) * open floor (samkottler, 17:21:03) * jzb sent out a rough pass at mizmo's questions (gholms, 17:27:33) * ACTION: jzb will send re:invent notes to the list this week (gholms, 17:28:09) * HELP: Please help test f20 images (gholms, 17:30:20) Meeting ended at 17:30:39 UTC. Action Items ------------ * mattdm to ping google about gce cloud-init patch upstream * jzb will send re:invent notes to the list this week Action Items, by person ----------------------- * jzb * jzb will send re:invent notes to the list this week * mattdm * mattdm to ping google about gce cloud-init patch upstream * **UNASSIGNED** * (none) People Present (lines said) --------------------------- * samkottler (52) * mattdm (32) * gholms (24) * jzb (8) * mrunge (6) * zodbot (5) * number80 (0) * rbergeron (0) 17:00:18 <samkottler> #startmeeting Cloud WG weekly meeting 17:00:18 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed Nov 20 17:00:18 2013 UTC. The chair is samkottler. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 17:00:18 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 17:00:38 <samkottler> #chair mattdm rbergeron number80 17:00:38 <zodbot> Current chairs: mattdm number80 rbergeron samkottler 17:00:45 <mattdm> hello! 17:00:59 <samkottler> heyya 17:01:08 <samkottler> #topic rollcall 17:01:13 * samkottler is here :) 17:01:14 <mrunge> hey 17:01:23 * mrunge is very shortly here 17:01:26 <samkottler> #chair mrunge 17:01:26 <zodbot> Current chairs: mattdm mrunge number80 rbergeron samkottler 17:01:44 * mrunge suggests a different meeting time, as this is very inconvenient for me 17:02:18 <samkottler> mrunge: that's a good thing to talk about on the list 17:02:21 <samkottler> it's hard to do over IRC 17:02:32 <mrunge> I agree samkottler 17:02:47 <mrunge> esp. since there are other person not attending the meeting as well 17:02:58 <mattdm> thanks for coming nonetheless :) 17:03:18 <samkottler> indeed :) 17:03:31 <samkottler> let's just wait a couple more minutes for people to show up 17:03:47 <mrunge> well, I need to run away very shortly. so, I'll just drop off 17:04:36 * gholms goes to sit with the peanut gallery 17:06:00 <samkottler> okay I guess we'll get started, although we don't have quorum 17:06:09 * mattdm nods 17:06:23 <samkottler> #topic Google compute 17:06:35 <mattdm> I don't know exactly why but it's been a crazy chaotic week nad I feel like zero time has passed since last meeting. *sigh* 17:06:41 <samkottler> frankie isn't here so no update on packaging work right now 17:06:57 <samkottler> mattdm: yeah, same :( 17:07:12 <mattdm> looks like there was agreement on the mailing list that we should focus on cloud-init in the images 17:07:25 <samkottler> mattdm: yeah, seems like we don't even need to vote on that 17:07:32 <mattdm> gholms What do you think about carrying that debian patch? 17:07:56 <samkottler> I was gonna kick the tires on the tools google built, but totally ran out of time 17:08:05 <gholms> I think it should go upstream for review. 17:08:17 <gholms> Then I'm totally happy to grab it. 17:08:29 <samkottler> gholms: does canonical maintain the upstream? 17:08:51 <gholms> Yes 17:08:52 <mattdm> I'll ping the google people about that. 17:09:06 <mattdm> #action mattdm to ping google about gce cloud-init patch upstream 17:09:30 <samkottler> I also reached out to legal about the trusted tester agreement 17:09:40 <samkottler> it's being reviewed right now, I should have word back today or tomorrow 17:09:53 * gholms hopes they aren't reluctant due to canonical's ridiculous contributor licensing racket 17:09:53 <samkottler> things seem promising, though 17:09:56 * samkottler knocks on wood 17:10:01 <gholms> Nice! 17:10:05 <samkottler> gholms: you mean bzr? 17:10:06 <samkottler> :P 17:10:21 <gholms> Nah, the full copyright license thing. 17:10:34 * gholms saves the rant for later 17:10:36 <samkottler> I know, twas kidding :) 17:10:44 <gholms> ;) 17:11:08 <samkottler> so yeah, that's all I've got on the GCE front 17:11:20 <samkottler> anyone got anything else to add? 17:11:22 <mattdm> (they did indicate in a mailing list post that upstream was a goal) 17:11:27 <gholms> What's the trusted tester thing? 17:11:29 <mattdm> that's aall from me for now too. 17:12:11 <samkottler> gholms: google makes people who want to upload images sign a document called the trusted tester agreement to basically give access to more advanced/not thoroughly tested parts of GCE 17:12:33 <samkottler> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/legal/2013-November/002304.html 17:12:51 <gholms> Mere mortals can't upload their own images? How sad. :( 17:13:32 <samkottler> gholms: I think ultimately they will be able to 17:13:40 <samkottler> the features just aren't fully rolled out 17:14:05 * gholms hopes that happens soon 17:14:17 <mattdm> gholms that's actually the state of the art in pretty much most public clouds except ec2 17:15:06 <gholms> Yup. It's really disappointing. 17:16:00 <mattdm> Yup. Next thing, then? 17:16:35 <samkottler> #topic marketing/design document 17:17:25 <samkottler> so some background, the design + marketing teams have asked for some info about what our aims are 17:17:28 <samkottler> so they can plan accordingly 17:17:29 <samkottler> https://fedorahosted.org/cloud/ticket/3 17:17:56 <mattdm> it's a really good question :) 17:18:03 <samkottler> if we come across any issues that are contentious they'll have to wait until we have quorum, though 17:18:23 <gholms> I don't think people know the difference between a server and a cloud guest yet, so we probably don't even know ourselves. ;) 17:18:24 <samkottler> mattdm: yeah, slightly interdependent on the PRD 17:18:43 <mattdm> definitely. 17:19:12 <samkottler> jzb just sent a really nice reply to the list 17:19:26 <mattdm> okay, so, proposal: more list discussion here. 17:19:57 <mattdm> (and by here, i mean "on this topic") 17:20:03 <samkottler> mattdm: WFM 17:20:08 <mattdm> (not "here on irc". that would make no sense) 17:20:29 <gholms> There are more people on the list. :) 17:20:58 <samkottler> okay then 17:21:03 <samkottler> #topic open floor 17:21:24 <mattdm> I think we haven't really settled on how targetted we are going to be and how much we're going to do, say, jeos vs. some bigger solution (like coreos+docker) vs. "appliance library" 17:21:50 <samkottler> mattdm: sorry, do you want to keep the last topic going? 17:22:10 <mattdm> eh. that's basically all I have to say and I don't think we're going to decide it right now ;) 17:22:19 <samkottler> agreed 17:22:33 <samkottler> that's part of both the PRD and 'what even are we doing?!' 17:22:37 <gholms> It doesn't even seem like people agree on whether the server should be the minimal thing or the guest should. More discussion is needed. 17:22:55 * mattdm nods 17:23:06 <mattdm> and then an actual decision. 17:23:10 <samkottler> we should probably loop in the server WG 17:23:20 <samkottler> and then have a bigger convo about all this 17:23:36 <mattdm> yeah. I actually have a bunch of mail in my inbox to reply to that relates to all of this. and on the server wg mailing list. 17:23:55 * samkottler needs to subscribe to that list 17:24:05 * gholms is still mad at openstack for overloading the term "server" even more 17:24:15 <mattdm> It's also possible that we end up doing that has a lot of overlap but in different ways. That's not as nice as everything fitting into a jigsaw puzzle but would still be okay. 17:24:37 * gholms nods 17:24:51 <samkottler> gholms: and triple-O even further blurs the lines 17:25:00 <gholms> Heh, yep 17:25:12 <samkottler> treat your servers like cloud guests and then run your cloud guests on your cloud guests 17:25:15 <samkottler> AHHH 17:25:28 * jzb apologizes for being late. Damn time zones. 17:25:33 <samkottler> #chair jzb 17:25:33 <zodbot> Current chairs: jzb mattdm mrunge number80 rbergeron samkottler 17:25:58 <gholms> Heya, jzb 17:26:07 <jzb> gholms: howdy 17:26:10 <mattdm> jzb not too much at this meeting. got anything to raise? 17:26:19 <gholms> samkottler: Eucalyptus does that, and let me tell you, it's awesome. 17:26:26 <jzb> mattdm: have we discussed the branding stuff? 17:26:39 <mattdm> jzb mostly we said "more mailing list discussion" 17:26:41 <jzb> I sent out a rough pass at the Q's mizmo asked 17:26:45 <jzb> OK 17:26:51 <mattdm> i saw but havne't read yet 17:27:07 <jzb> I'm writing up notes from re:Invent that I will share to the list later this week 17:27:22 <mattdm> she asked for that back by dec 3 so I think we should try to have something to by official for next week 17:27:30 <mattdm> "to be" 17:27:33 <gholms> #info jzb sent out a rough pass at mizmo's questions 17:27:56 <jzb> that's all I've got unless someone's got a task for me 17:28:09 <gholms> #action jzb will send re:invent notes to the list this week 17:28:51 * samkottler doesn't have any other topics 17:29:26 <mattdm> yep i think we're done for now. 17:29:40 <mattdm> f20 test candidate images are coming out.... 17:29:55 <mattdm> testing them is a helpful thing to do. :) 17:29:59 <jzb> mattdm: here I was worried I wouldn't have anything to do over Thanksgiving. 17:30:10 <mattdm> jzb right :) 17:30:20 <gholms> #help Please help test f20 images 17:30:39 <samkottler> #endmeeting

1 0

Fedora 20 TC1 AMIs
by Dennis Gilmore 14 Nov '13

14 Nov '13

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi all, Final TC1 images have been uploaded to EC2 and are available at ami-fb81a492 : us-east-1 image for i386 ami-6581a40c : us-east-1 image for x86_64 additionally if your looking to the AMI's they have been added to files in the release tree http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/20-TC1/Images/i386/Fedora-Images-… http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/20-TC1/Images/x86_64/Fedora-Image… when we get to final Beta and the images are uploaded to all regions they will all be listed and the file will be gpg signed in the final tree Dennis -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJShWgdAAoJEH7ltONmPFDRx3IQAIKu/ICtzU20Wt798WaU8wVV OJ+4RXlWl1QS0pi8DHVG0oYrmxyFmQ/+cEExtmL9rq4cPGyPFIF9nHr7fdWjTe6L Ki9uUpS4o2py9sGxDzWZ7nqotdUhuzPUApQCqG+3qkRxIlKNJY6l/oNjrdQYe8L8 aNdKuFXq60DToVK9sO8ALDwFbx2UbRwCOzftHrLd8F2FlqkSVTmt+Tdq72lXYghD rBl/NL51ZfNn2lSN37LrragkNv2KCw9BFuooGnsEjRTxz1KrP5JEYJl+J6AEHAyF 64QE98jssIxJljedh9SnIW8ql6wYRBjs8MX0LDSj1mLtZLVyJU2tPIu1wCLzAq3U axUMIyiuLfsPccJcNCuKg8iom+KF1OzWRR//6uNiMzFccXWYP5zgHHuASHsDupDN eWBSLJadan+00Y7aRvuGrDYdqqj4Mr0ViPx6hFOYwe5Z6htTvVZXkvCnLZHsqzdR njmqwnV0kvQ2Pn/DZU4jQyjW3nDdVTddJauuls6f0sZOKlQICWw7XxN8O+B6mC8K ed1mIAAXa3qZdGWilcqe1ZUtL9Lvegf6sPK+5+8DceorCj8BJh4lTHkQFJPLog7/ hoHXtFSG4Slz8PNtT+i3GlmObo+6HXviC//67NZkQ2cvBYy1Kp9aHouJw//Lz82p 6lsFC3615ewhWpdQ54CF =357Q -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

GCE - cloud init, or google-daemon/google-startup-scripts
by Matthew Miller 14 Nov '13

14 Nov '13

The documentation for building an image for Google Compute Engine (GCE): https://developers.google.com/compute/docs/building-image Most of this is very similar to our existing cloud images. A few of the changes we could integrate across the board. Some will need testing (hostname setting?), but I don't see anything exotic. Debian is carrying a patch for cloud-init provided by Google http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=725384, and we could do the same instead of integrating google-daemon and google-startup-scripts. I assume this will get upstream at some point (there is some discussion of that in the Debian bug). I don't _absolutely_ love cloud-init, but it's well-understood and common, and fits with our existing images, making it easier to document how to do things with our image, and etc. What do we think? -- Matthew Miller ☁☁☁ Fedora Cloud Architect ☁☁☁ <mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>

6 5

Interaction and intersection with the server WG
by Matthias Runge 14 Nov '13

14 Nov '13

Hey everybody, during yesterday's cloud WG meeting, the question about interaction and interference with the server WG came to us. There are quite a few intersection points, e.g. when thinking about providing cloud server infrastructure (which probably belongs to server WG). But when it comes to ssh key injection in the cloud image itself, we need both WG to collaborate. Thus, I'd like to ask for opinions: should we (as Cloud WG) take responsibilities for cloud infrastructure, should we deny that, how do you differentiate between cloud and server WG? Matthias

2 3

Minutes from today's (11-13-2013) cloud WG meeting
by Sam Kottler 13 Nov '13

13 Nov '13

Thanks everyone who was able to make it to the meeting today! For those who weren't able to make it, here are few important links: Minutes: http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2013-11-13/fedora-meeting… Minutes (text): http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2013-11-13/fedora-meeting… Log: http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2013-11-13/fedora-meeting… Here's a summary of the meeting (link to the HTML version above): ========================================== #fedora-meeting-1: Cloud WG weekly meeting ========================================== Meeting started by samkottler at 17:00:31 UTC. The full logs are available at http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2013-11-13/fedora-meeting… . Meeting summary --------------- * rollcall (samkottler, 17:02:00) * agenda items (samkottler, 17:05:55) * A few tools need to get packaged for GCE support, primarily gcutil and image_bundle. All of them are free software and on GitHub. (gholms, 17:07:58) * ACTION: samkottler to figure out what's needed in koji to get images built there (samkottler, 17:09:44) * LINK: http://lists.debian.org/debian-cloud/2013/10/msg00004.html (mattdm, 17:12:43) * hguemar is looking to package gcutil and image_bundle (number80, 17:14:13) * LINK: https://code.google.com/p/google-compute-engine-tools/ (gholms, 17:15:18) * LINK: https://github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/compute-image-packages (samkottler, 17:18:18) * ACTION: mattdm to kick of thread re google scripts vs cloud-init (mattdm, 17:23:49) * governance document review before submission to FESCo (samkottler, 17:25:10) * ACCEPTED: add wording to charter about commiting to membership every 6 months like server wg (+6) (mattdm, 17:40:58) * ACCEPTED: governance charter as of https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Cloud/Governance&oldid=360627 ratified (mattdm, 17:44:39) * open floor (mattdm, 17:45:35) * we need to figure out our interaction with the server wg and how we define what we're doing (mattdm, 17:53:35) Meeting ended at 17:57:01 UTC. Action Items ------------ * samkottler to figure out what's needed in koji to get images built there * mattdm to kick of thread re google scripts vs cloud-init Action Items, by person ----------------------- * mattdm * mattdm to kick of thread re google scripts vs cloud-init * samkottler * samkottler to figure out what's needed in koji to get images built there * **UNASSIGNED** * (none) People Present (lines said) --------------------------- * mattdm (92) * frankieonuonga (77) * samkottler (51) * mrunge (38) * number80 (21) * gholms (16) * nirik (8) * zodbot (5) * croberts (3) * geppetto (2) * dgilmore (1) * rbergeron (0) 17:00:31 <samkottler> #startmeeting Cloud WG weekly meeting 17:00:31 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed Nov 13 17:00:31 2013 UTC. The chair is samkottler. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 17:00:31 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 17:00:49 <samkottler> #chair frankieonuonga mrunge mattdm rbergeron number80 geppetto 17:00:49 <zodbot> Current chairs: frankieonuonga geppetto mattdm mrunge number80 rbergeron samkottler 17:01:11 <samkottler> anyone I missed? 17:02:00 <samkottler> #topic rollcall 17:02:05 * frankieonuonga is here 17:02:18 * mrunge is here 17:02:19 * gholms takes a seat in the bleachers 17:02:52 * samkottler waits for a few more people to show up 17:03:28 * frankieonuonga suggests three min 17:03:29 <mrunge> imho red_trela said, he didn't had time for this meeting 17:04:16 <mattdm> hi all 17:04:22 <samkottler> hey mattdm! 17:04:25 <mrunge> hey 17:04:28 <number80> hi 17:04:30 <mattdm> sorry I am in a seriously split brain state :) 17:04:39 <gholms> mattdm: Isn't that the norm these days? :P 17:05:01 <mattdm> gholms apparently. :) 17:05:14 <mattdm> I'd take some time off to collect myself but that would just make the problem worse. 17:05:18 <mattdm> so here we are. :) 17:05:23 <samkottler> I have to head into a read-only state at 12:30 17:05:30 <samkottler> mattdm: are you okay with taking over at 12:30? 17:05:32 <mattdm> okay let's go then. :) 17:05:36 <mattdm> samkottler yep 17:05:39 <frankieonuonga> lets play 17:05:40 <samkottler> mattdm: thanks 17:05:45 <frankieonuonga> welcome guys 17:05:51 <frankieonuonga> i mean welcome folks 17:05:55 <samkottler> #topic agenda items 17:06:01 <samkottler> so GCE 17:06:15 <samkottler> I've been talking with the GCE people this past week and have good news 17:06:22 <mattdm> cool 17:06:26 <frankieonuonga> amazing . 17:06:34 <frankieonuonga> whats up ? 17:06:35 <samkottler> there are a few tools that need to get packaged, but all of them are free software and are on github 17:06:39 <mrunge> what is GCE ? 17:06:44 <samkottler> mrunge: google compute 17:06:48 <gholms> Google compute engine 17:06:55 <mrunge> ah, thanks, I see. 17:06:56 <mattdm> Google Compute Engine. A public cloud provider 17:06:56 <number80> samkottler: list them 17:07:19 <frankieonuonga> cool. 17:07:41 <frankieonuonga> samkottler: packaging should be easy 17:07:42 <samkottler> gcutil and image_bundler are the main two 17:07:48 <frankieonuonga> and at least they are open source 17:07:53 <samkottler> s/image_bundler/image_bundle 17:07:58 <gholms> #info A few tools need to get packaged for GCE support, primarily gcutil and image_bundle. All of them are free software and on GitHub. 17:08:20 <mattdm> I looked at the "what does the image need to look like" instructions 17:08:32 <mattdm> it seems like we are mostly in good shape already 17:09:20 <samkottler> I also spoke with dgilmore about how to get images built in koji and we will likely need to work with mikem to write a plugin to handle it 17:09:31 <mattdm> samkottler what format do the images need to be in? 17:09:44 <samkottler> #action samkottler to figure out what's needed in koji to get images built there 17:09:53 <frankieonuonga> samkottler and dgilmore please loop me into it 17:10:03 <frankieonuonga> that is what is needed for koji 17:10:16 <mattdm> samkottler I think they just want a raw disk file, actually. we already make that 17:10:19 <samkottler> frankieonuonga: absolutely, if you want to take charge on that item feel free :) 17:10:20 <frankieonuonga> this should go in line with rel-eng tasks right ? 17:10:30 <samkottler> mattdm: right, but do we need koji to upload it 17:10:39 <frankieonuonga> ok. 17:10:46 <mattdm> samkottler right now dennis uploads the ec2 images by hand 17:10:46 <samkottler> or do we just handle that externally? 17:10:49 <mattdm> koji doesn't do any uploading 17:11:01 <mattdm> we have the start of a separate uploader service for ec2 17:11:18 <mattdm> but it needs polish and finish. (the stuff andrew worked on last summer) 17:12:20 <samkottler> does someone want to take ownership of creating gcutil and image_bundle packages? 17:12:29 <samkottler> I can do a review for them, but I'm pretty swamped this week 17:12:40 <mattdm> we also maybe should look at GCE cloud-init integration 17:12:43 <mattdm> http://lists.debian.org/debian-cloud/2013/10/msg00004.html 17:12:45 <mattdm> gholms ^ 17:12:47 <frankieonuonga> I can take that 17:12:50 <frankieonuonga> not a problem 17:13:02 <frankieonuonga> how soon are they required ? 17:13:22 <mattdm> frankieonuonga it would be pretty nice to have this with F20 17:13:27 <mattdm> so soon :) 17:13:31 <samkottler> frankieonuonga: the sooner the better at this point 17:13:38 <samkottler> yeah, I'd love to get the tools into f20 17:14:04 <frankieonuonga> :-) ok. will look into it and mail you guys tomorrow..but i think i would like to be done by sat 17:14:10 * gholms attempts to find those tools on github 17:14:13 <number80> #info hguemar is looking to package gcutil and image_bundle 17:14:23 <dgilmore> samkottler: we need something out of koji that can run on a releng box and do the uploading 17:14:28 <number80> gcutil is on google code 17:14:41 <samkottler> number80: frankieonuonga already volunteered 17:14:45 <samkottler> you two wanna work together on that? 17:14:59 <samkottler> number80: yeah, I just sent searching again for it, too, and google code is the place 17:15:08 <samkottler> the google folks told me github, not sure why 17:15:18 <gholms> https://code.google.com/p/google-compute-engine-tools/ 17:15:24 <number80> https://github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/compute-image-packages/tree/master/i… 17:15:35 <number80> i found image_bundle, quite well hidden 17:15:46 <mattdm> number80, gholms, samkottler -- looks like debian is going with the cloud-init integration for running *in* the image 17:16:07 <gholms> mattdm: That's the idea, yeah. Do you happen to know if they bothered to ask upstream as well? 17:16:24 <number80> samkottler: ok, i already started with gcutil last week but i'm fine with leaving image_bundle 17:16:26 <number80> #undo 17:16:26 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Link object at 0x128aebd0> 17:16:28 <mattdm> gholms they said that they would but it might take some time. not sure what that's all about 17:16:45 <samkottler> #link https://code.google.com/p/google-compute-engine-tools/ 17:16:49 <frankieonuonga> samkottler: sure we can work on it together with hguemar 17:16:56 <gholms> samkottler: I already posted that one. ;) 17:17:03 <number80> yup 17:17:15 <samkottler> gholms: without hash-link :) 17:17:37 <gholms> samkottler: meetbot has picked up messages that start with links since 2010. 17:17:44 <samkottler> #undo 17:17:44 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Link object at 0x15360710> 17:17:52 <samkottler> gholms: still fresh at this - thanks :) 17:18:05 <gholms> No worries. I'm happy to help. ;) 17:18:18 <samkottler> https://github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/compute-image-packages 17:18:53 <gholms> I'm a little concerned by that google code page's source browser not actually containing any code, but I guess that's the best we're likely to get. 17:20:26 <samkottler> gholms: yeah, I noticed that too, not really sure what the deal is with it 17:20:30 <samkottler> I can ask the google folks 17:21:01 <samkottler> anyone else got stuff to add before we move on? 17:21:20 * gholms hopes all the bundled libs for gcutil are easy to split out 17:21:27 <mattdm> At some point we will have to decide if we want to configure the instance with cloud-init or google-startup-scripts 17:21:45 <frankieonuonga> mattdm: yeah you are right 17:21:49 <frankieonuonga> i totally agree. 17:22:12 <mattdm> but having them all available seems like a good start :) 17:22:12 <gholms> mattdm: Is the "one image for everything" idea still important? 17:22:12 <samkottler> I don't really like cloud-init all that much, but it's a known beast 17:22:20 <mattdm> samkottler +1 17:22:41 <gholms> cloud-init is kind of annoying, but on the bright side it's portable. 17:22:41 <samkottler> gholms: it is right now, that's a topic for another meeting 17:22:46 <frankieonuonga> can we lay down all pros and cons on email then decide 17:22:52 * gholms nods 17:22:53 <mattdm> +1 to take to email 17:23:00 <frankieonuonga> +1 17:23:12 <samkottler> who wants to kick off that thread? 17:23:49 <mattdm> #action mattdm to kick of thread re google scripts vs cloud-init 17:23:52 <mattdm> me 17:23:52 <number80> +1 17:23:58 <mrunge> +1 17:24:01 <samkottler> thanks mattdm 17:24:45 <samkottler> can we move on to the governance doc? 17:24:56 <number80> yes 17:25:10 <samkottler> #topic governance document review before submission to FESCo 17:25:25 <samkottler> mattdm: this will run longer than 5 minutes, so do you want to take over? 17:25:36 <mattdm> sure 17:25:56 <mattdm> although, um, I think the state of it is "mattdm said he would make some changes and isn't really done doing everything he said he would do" 17:26:06 * nirik has something for open floor if someone can ping me when it gets to that. ;) 17:26:28 * frankieonuonga will ping nirik 17:26:29 <mattdm> also, I think we should take a look at the docs from other groups and regularize language where we can 17:26:40 <number80> just to notice that there were no changes for 2 weeks 17:26:48 <frankieonuonga> is this the PRD? 17:26:50 <mattdm> so my proposal is for me to actually do those things and bring it back next week 17:26:56 <mattdm> frankieonuonga no, governance doc 17:27:01 <number80> frankieonuonga: nope: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Cloud/Governance 17:27:01 <mattdm> number80 see above :) 17:27:02 <samkottler> mattdm: isn't it due tomorrow? 17:27:08 <frankieonuonga> I see. 17:27:15 <mattdm> gah. lookit the time. 17:27:31 <mattdm> okay so. new plan. :) 17:27:38 <gholms> Heh 17:28:02 <frankieonuonga> we might need to finlize this thing like now..in terms of pressing issues to be discussed . 17:28:05 <mattdm> I edited the document with the basic changes we agreed to last time. 17:28:15 * samkottler has to go mostly offline now 17:28:20 <mattdm> samkottler kk 17:28:57 <frankieonuonga> so what is basically expected in this doc that is not there 17:29:03 <mrunge> is there anything missing in that document? 17:29:07 <frankieonuonga> are there any issues that need clarification ? 17:29:48 <mattdm> one of the issues in the other documents is quorum 17:30:06 <frankieonuonga> mattdm: kindly expound 17:30:17 <mattdm> eh wait we covered that too 17:30:34 <frankieonuonga> oh yeahâ€¦two meetings ago 17:30:37 <frankieonuonga> that we did . 17:30:37 <number80> a quorum of 5 should be ok 17:30:55 <frankieonuonga> we just need to access that log and do what we agreed 17:30:56 <mattdm> okay, so the other thing is that the server wg has a bit about "Each voting member of the working group will confirm their continued membership every six months." 17:30:59 <mattdm> do we want that? 17:31:13 <frankieonuonga> we had talked about this right 17:31:21 <frankieonuonga> we agreed for now..no way. 17:31:34 <frankieonuonga> reasoning behind it was it is a short time to get things going 17:31:43 <frankieonuonga> especially in a field that is still fresh 17:31:57 <mattdm> frankieonuonga I think this was just a way for making sure everyone involved was still active 17:32:04 <mattdm> not a need for a revote 17:32:07 <number80> that's neat though i'd prefer people resigning by themselves 17:32:11 <mrunge> I don't see any issue with refreshing 17:32:27 <number80> the same 17:32:33 <frankieonuonga> wasnt this voted on in that meeting. 17:32:53 <mattdm> frankieonuonga yeah I just wanted to know if we wanted to add their idea 17:32:54 <frankieonuonga> sorry but I feel we might be having the same conversation again 17:33:03 <mrunge> I agree, when anyone can foresee, he has no time to work in the group, I'd expect him/her to resign 17:33:12 <mattdm> okay, so, sounds like we want to leave it as is. 17:33:34 * frankieonuonga nods 17:33:40 <mattdm> do we want to approve it as it is? 17:33:57 <mattdm> do we actually have quorum to do so? 17:33:57 <frankieonuonga> yes. 17:34:01 <mrunge> so, it's and appointment for lifetime? 17:34:10 <mrunge> s/and/an/ 17:34:13 <frankieonuonga> i think we need that until we are good to go.. 17:34:25 <frankieonuonga> or at least until things are of the ground 17:34:26 <mattdm> mrunge we assume there will be enough natural turnover 17:34:44 <mattdm> other groups went the same way 17:34:45 <number80> mrunge: until you're unable to serve like FPC 17:34:50 <mrunge> mattdm, if we can guarantee that 17:35:00 * croberts croberts is here running late 17:35:12 <mattdm> mrunge what, by making sure we burn everyone out? :) 17:35:18 * frankieonuonga waving at croberts 17:35:29 * mrunge likes fresh ideas from fresh people from time to time 17:35:50 <frankieonuonga> i think if we change ideas too soon when starting we will end up failing 17:35:54 <frankieonuonga> sorry to insist on this 17:36:04 <frankieonuonga> but this was discussed in length earlier 17:36:07 <frankieonuonga> with so many reasons 17:36:10 <samkottler> I'm lurking so I think we have quorum 17:36:15 <mrunge> and refreshing is something like refreshing commitment 17:36:55 <mattdm> mrunge okay, so, like the server wg wording? appointments stay until you step down, but you do need to say you still want to be involved? 17:37:05 <mattdm> I'm okay with either adding that or leaving it open as it is now. 17:37:27 <mattdm> "able and willing", with no hard-coded definition of what that means 17:37:30 <mrunge> mattdm, yes, I like that. that's more encouraging 17:37:54 <mrunge> ...encouraging people to do something, 17:38:22 <mrunge> we might want to change that, e.g time-span, if refreshing just becomes tedious 17:38:33 <mattdm> okay, so: proposal: add wording like server wg's about members confirming their membership every six months 17:38:39 <mattdm> +1 to my own proposal 17:38:45 <frankieonuonga> +1 17:38:49 <geppetto> +1 17:38:49 <mrunge> +1 for that 17:39:10 <number80> +1 17:39:15 <samkottler> +1 17:39:38 <croberts> +1 17:40:00 <mattdm> croberts wait that confuses my counting :) 17:40:11 <mrunge> heh 17:40:27 <mattdm> but anyway 17:40:28 <croberts> :P 17:40:53 <frankieonuonga> :-) 17:40:58 <mattdm> #accepted add wording to charter about commiting to membership every 6 months like server wg (+6) 17:41:06 <mattdm> anything else anyone wants to raise? 17:41:28 <mattdm> i went ahead and did that :) 17:41:52 <mattdm> so: proposal: accept governance charter as https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Cloud/Governance&oldid=360627 17:42:07 <mattdm> +1 to myself, again 17:42:08 <frankieonuonga> is there any missing content 17:42:19 <frankieonuonga> maybe something to be included ? 17:42:21 <frankieonuonga> i am not sure 17:42:26 <frankieonuonga> that is why i am asking 17:42:46 <mattdm> frankieonuonga Maybe. I like simple. We can always add additional rules / bylaws if needed 17:43:17 <samkottler> remember that we can always amend stuff 17:43:18 <mrunge> do we want to keep the list of members in that document? 17:43:27 <geppetto> mattdm: +1 â€¦ seems simple enough. 17:43:29 <frankieonuonga> ok . sounds fine. I know nothing about this ..so I will just agree 17:43:44 <mrunge> ... if members change, that document needs to be reviewed again... 17:43:45 <mattdm> mrunge I think so, because it's important for that to be easily findable. 17:43:46 <samkottler> mattdm: +1 17:43:57 <frankieonuonga> +1 17:44:04 <number80> mattdm: +1 17:44:05 <mrunge> ok. +1 tjem 17:44:09 <mrunge> then 17:44:15 <mattdm> mrunge i think it's implied that that section can change to match reality 17:44:23 <mattdm> okay so that's 6 17:44:39 <mattdm> #accepted governance charter as of https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Cloud/Governance&oldid=360627 ratified 17:44:40 <mrunge> I'd expect that kind of information somewhere, mattdm 17:44:53 <mrunge> (members etc.) 17:45:16 * mattdm notes that when the fedora board changed this year, it took 6 months for the list to get updated. :) 17:45:30 <mattdm> okay, so, fesco meeting soon so let's move on. 17:45:35 <mattdm> #topic open floor 17:45:42 <mattdm> nirik? 17:45:47 <frankieonuonga> let me get nirik 17:45:47 <mrunge> yes 17:45:57 <nirik> Just something to ponder on/bring up: 17:46:31 <nirik> how do you folks see the interaction between the server wg and cloud wg? do you want us to handle the server end and you just do images? or you do both? or ? 17:46:57 <nirik> for example, an openstack server is something we might want to make a server role... 17:47:09 <mrunge> well.... 17:47:24 <frankieonuonga> I have a diff opinion 17:47:26 <nirik> I don't know that we need an answer right now, but something to think about? 17:47:26 <mattdm> nirik I think that that's what we're thinking, yes. 17:47:39 <mattdm> nirik looks like we don't have consensus :) 17:47:56 <frankieonuonga> we may need someone on both ends 17:48:00 <mattdm> i think we might provide images for compute hosts in openstack 17:48:06 <frankieonuonga> cause one can not exist without the other 17:48:25 <mrunge> frankieonuonga, no. a server could live without a cloud image 17:48:28 <frankieonuonga> I think that we also need top look at all other platforms 17:48:54 <frankieonuonga> to look i mean 17:49:00 <frankieonuonga> a server could do that 17:49:07 <mrunge> my initial thought saw the cloud wg as wg to provide infrastructure to host cloud images 17:49:20 <number80> nirik: the server WG is quite central due to the various usage, i think that cloud WG will serve as a stakeholder for cloud hosting and we will probably participate to the making and testing 17:49:21 <frankieonuonga> but a server can also exist without having open stack. 17:49:23 <mrunge> and everything in that image will be filled by server wg 17:49:31 <frankieonuonga> there are too many variables 17:50:00 <nirik> right, it's interaction on many levels. ;) 17:50:25 <mattdm> mrunge The Fedora Cloud SIG has traditionally been focused on making Amazon images... in your model there's nothing for us to do. :) 17:50:29 <nirik> there's the bare metal side/server, and then inside cloud instances there could be many servers that people want to run 17:51:08 <frankieonuonga> I think this is something we need to look into for sur e 17:51:10 <frankieonuonga> sure i mean 17:51:20 <mrunge> mattdm, oh yes, there is. but I agreed to shut up ;-) 17:51:27 <mattdm> mrunge lol :) 17:51:43 <mattdm> nirik does that answer your question? heh. 17:51:48 <frankieonuonga> mrunge: dont shut up 17:52:04 <mrunge> frankieonuonga, let's discuss that at a different time 17:52:06 <frankieonuonga> I think this is a healthy conversation 17:52:11 <mattdm> +1 :) 17:52:19 <frankieonuonga> I think we should kick it of on email 17:52:23 <number80> +1 17:52:35 <nirik> yeah, just wanted to start everyone thinking about it. 17:52:44 <frankieonuonga> thanks nirik 17:52:52 <mattdm> frankieonuonga i think this is the 'ZOMG WHAT ARE WE BUILDING?!' thread from last week? 17:53:03 <mattdm> but another thread with a more specific title wouldn't hurt :) 17:53:14 <mattdm> frankieonuonga or mrunge you want to do that? 17:53:25 <mrunge> and I guess, there was an earlier thread as well 17:53:35 <mattdm> #info we need to figure out our interaction with the server wg and how we define what we're doing 17:53:41 <mrunge> mattdm, I can do that 17:53:41 <frankieonuonga> I have already taken a taskâ€¦I dont want to seem like i am hogging 17:53:54 <mattdm> cool mrunge go for it :) 17:53:56 * frankieonuonga thankful that mrunge has taken that 17:54:15 <mrunge> as if my plate wasn't already full enough 17:54:30 <mattdm> I hear you. :) 17:54:35 <mrunge> no, will do that 17:54:35 <frankieonuonga> no offence 17:54:41 <mattdm> okay, so other topics :) 17:54:45 <mattdm> if any. 17:54:46 <frankieonuonga> which reminds me..what happen to that google thing we were to sign for non disclosure or something like that ? 17:54:56 <mattdm> frankieonuonga ping samkottler on that? 17:55:06 <samkottler> frankieonuonga: email me and I'll have them reach out 17:55:06 <frankieonuonga> ok will do 17:55:13 <frankieonuonga> will do 17:55:39 <mrunge> why should there be an nda? it's under ASL, right? 17:55:55 <mrunge> but confirming is better 17:56:57 <mattdm> okay, so I'm going to end the meeting because I need to grab food quick before fesco starts. 17:57:01 <mattdm> #endmeeting

1 0

Roles and responsibilities
by Frankie 13 Nov '13

13 Nov '13

Hi folks, I trust all is well. I also hope you all had a great weekend. As per our meeting last week(2013-11-06) I am sending out this email. I would love to get to work on the landing page really soon. In order to do that I request that we list down what people would love to be in charge of. It gives us the roles of the various group members and their responsibilities I think this is necessary so it makes it easier for someone to be reached in regards to a specific topic, workflow e.t.c. (Something to do with bureaucracy ) - Just joking. Anyway So just to get the ball rolling, as per the meeting I took up release engineering with Dgilmore. Please do advice what you would like to take up. This does not limit us to what the group will be limited to. I am sure we can squeeze in more if required . Thank you and good day/night. Kind Regards, Onuonga Frankie -- Skype: Frankie.Onuonga twitter: Frankieonuonga irc #freenode: Frankie.onuonga

4 9

Reminder + topics for tomorrow's (11/13/2013) cloud WG meeting
by Sam Kottler 13 Nov '13

13 Nov '13

Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FESCo meeting Wednesday at 17:00UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on irc.freenode.net. To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto or run: date -d '2013-11-13 17:00 UTC' = Followups = * Licensing and 'packageability' of the tools needed to build images for GCE = New business = * Governance document final review and vote before submission to FESCo If you would like to add something to this agenda, you can reply to this e-mail, file a new ticket at https://fedorahosted.org/cloud, e-mail me directly, or bring it up at the end of the meeting, during the open floor. See you all tomorrow at 17:00 UTC! -Sam P.S. I've ripped off this template from FESCo meeting schedules and will try to keep the format the same going forward.

3 3

Cloud WG Trac: inform voting member of new tickets?
by Sandro "red" Mathys 12 Nov '13

12 Nov '13

Would it be possible (and desired) to have the Cloud WG Trac send an email to all current voting members (and possible anyone else interested) whenever a new ticket is opened? Just so people don't miss them and know what to weigh in on in case they can't make a meeting, etc. Kindly let me know if everyone can set that up (for) himself and point me to the option I'm not seeing :) Thanks, Sandro

3 2

Meeting time going forward
by Sam Kottler 12 Nov '13

12 Nov '13

Hi, Hope you all had a nice weekend! I'd like to set a more permanent meeting time so we don't have to do a whenisgood each week and handle coordination. Using the last two weeks as a guide, it seems like an early evening time in UTC, somewhere between 17:00 and 20:00, on Wednesday works well for people. Does anyone have any conflict or objection to setting the meeting for 18:00 UTC each week? -Sam

7 13

Attending AWS re:Invent - what would you like to know?
by Joe Brockmeier 11 Nov '13

11 Nov '13

I'm going to be going to AWS re:Invent this week with an eye to talking to people about how they're using images on AWS and how Fedora can improve there. (Among other things.) If you were in my shoes, any specific questions you'd like answers to? Best, jzb -- Joe Brockmeier | Principal Cloud & Storage Analyst jzb(a)redhat.com | http://community.redhat.com/ Twitter: @jzb | http://dissociatedpress.net/

4 3

Documentation
by Rahul Sundaram 08 Nov '13

08 Nov '13

Hi Basic issues can be avoided by either better documentation or avoiding the need for entering a password if that can be done https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/users/2013-November/442232.html The cloud is apparently still a draft and outdated https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora_Draft_Documentation/0.1/html/Cl… Since there is now a cloud WG, I am bringing this to your attention in hope that you can consider good documentation as part of your goals Rahul

2 1

Fedora 20-Beta RC5 AMIs
by Dennis Gilmore 07 Nov '13

07 Nov '13

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 hi all, Beta RC5 images have been uploaded to EC2 and are available at ami-8b4219e2 : us-east-1 image for i386 ami-2f421946 : us-east-1 image for x86_64 additionally if your looking to the AMI's they have been added to files in the release tree http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/20-Beta-RC5/Images/i386/Fedora-Im… http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/20-Beta-RC5/Images/x86_64/Fedora-… when we get to final Beta and the images are uploaded to all regions they will all be listed and the file will be gpg signed in the final tree Dennis -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJSevy8AAoJEH7ltONmPFDRBaQP/18Ugi6jB/q8Ej5s31xItFzZ lQIzXZZDDOTHiRxWpzAKYAnu9Mo4N0QQk/OxjVPbuG9fwc1LaggauMWvYVbsy8sn b3vzUSsJFWS6A1WdG817IICPHI/3GlGacdL+O2aGM3WZsr654R0p/9rxgUPo9a+A KYBBP/mk+ur/y2larMaaIN+Sd3pwIl9ayG9k2uujkt9Up9combLPlBnzUQ/TM+Iy abdmRmCG49KSeTNvRRUJkoZd5+r9cB8CzKQYnTLZjNviTouIoDeApV4SZa1tOwzg Zu5ZQgs35rEr0+k4Z3vnXcZ5KDERQ2gvFDQJ5ng1LiLUJaOVkFG7D/JxR59/EbvX Tm5Pr1M32FzmuIQg3hFxFNji7CbLGn/s3QQKHPd80tr7ba/yyEJqIrf4Y0ay9VTH jtbppmThFhTWYP0lt1Sqgna8TwTXjwwK2bcuMpfsSrZuhQEuAPZpFf5HZA6Y+wCt 8wfjNPatbcktyANppbLQXq7dOwDZAUPwwgW2Bo7sk5k1OSvLKKmEwAWQPNdsmljF VO9zUZWbtP5Arpg9dV1580p1lXBVGNHKNSqYjj59IhAgeQOKHrusi0jyjQXvyQKP fnn7nRhQnj50QKjNvE2nRY74O4l9YMUxAoBaBnzb3Mff2hqSokgD419j9HSH0tIt 3pejUkTfj2POgdifZihE =1VYS -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

cloud November 2013