mattdm reported a new issue against the project: `cloud-sig` that you are following:
``
See https://pagure.io/Fedora-Council/tickets/issue/139
I'm looking into what we can do about the non-official and possibly malicious AMIs, but a first-line defense should be making sure we expand to these new regions right away when they come online. Since we're (still; *sigh*) not in the Marketplace, we need to make sure this happens by hand.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/cloud-sig/issue/282
NOTE: if you respond to this message please 'reply-all'.
I'd like to discuss firewalld on atomic host. Recently I was trying to
figure out the best way to explain to other users how to set firewall rules
on atomic host.
Usually I would say add your rules and then iptables-save, but on Atomic
Host docker has added it's firewall rules in there dynamically so if you iptables-save
you'll get a bunch of stuff that you don't want in your static configuration.
There are ways around this; manually create your config file, or use iptables-save
and then rip the docker stuff out. Either way it's a bit of a pain. I think
firewalld would make this easier on the user. Not sure of the pro/con ratio though.
Thoughts?
Dusty
Dear all,
You are kindly invited to the meeting:
Fedora Cloud Workgroup on 2017-11-01 from 17:00:00 to 18:00:00 UTC
At fedora-meeting-1(a)irc.freenode.net
The meeting will be about:
Standing meeting for the Fedora Cloud Workgroup
Source: https://apps.fedoraproject.org/calendar/meeting/1999/
# F27 Blocker Review meeting
# Date: 2017-10-30
# Time: 16:00 UTC
# Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.freenode.net
Hi folks! We currently have 2 proposed Final blockers, 1 proposed
Final freeze exception, and 1 proposed Server Beta blocker, so let's
have a Fedora 27 blocker review meeting.
If you have time tonight, you can take a look at the proposed or
accepted blockers before the meeting - the full lists can be found
here: https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/ .
We'll be evaluating these bugs to see if they violate any of the
Release Criteria and warrant the blocking of a release if they're not
fixed. Information on the release criteria for F27 can be found on the
wiki [0].
For more information about the Blocker and Freeze exception process,
check out these links:
- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_blocker_bug_process
- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_freeze_exception_bug_process
And for those of you who are curious how a Blocker Review Meeting
works - or how it's supposed to go and you want to run one - check out
the SOP on the wiki:
- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting
Note that for the special case of the Server release being split from
the main release stream for Fedora 27, we have created separate Server
blocker tracking bugs and will be following the same basic process for
the Server release dates using those trackers.
Have a good night and see you tomorrow!
[0] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Release_Criteria
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net
puiterwijk opened a new pull-request against the project: `fedora-atomic` that you are following:
``
Base for f27
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/fedora-atomic/pull-request/91
puiterwijk opened a new pull-request against the project: `fedora-atomic` that you are following:
``
Make the list of repos empty in the default inherit chain
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/fedora-atomic/pull-request/90
puiterwijk opened a new pull-request against the project: `fedora-atomic` that you are following:
``
Add treefile for f27-updates-testing
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/fedora-atomic/pull-request/89