On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 2:37 PM, Mike Ruckman &lt;roshi@fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote:<div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div class="plaintext" style="white-space: pre-wrap;">* Crucial basic Docket Host Image decisions  (jzb, 08:07:23)
  * <a href="https://fedorahosted.org/cloud/ticket/47">https://fedorahosted.org/cloud/ticket/47</a>  (jzb, 08:07:36)
  * AGREED: fedora atomic docker-specific image will not include yum/dnf
    (mattdm, 08:15:47)</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>OK, but with rpm-ostree I'd like to highlight that it does already link to libhawkey and rpm, which are the same C libraries underlying dnf. &nbsp;This is important preparatory work for package layering.</div><div><br></div><div>That said, has anyone built a list of blockers/issues they see? &nbsp;I have made a good amount of progress on Anaconda, and I'm pretty confident of delivery by next month.</div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div class="plaintext" style="white-space: pre-wrap;">  * AGREED: try min-metadata-service for fedora atomic image for alpha,
    fall back to cloud-init for beta if it doesn't work out  (mattdm,
    08:29:56)</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I'm interested in this as well, although I don't see it as so critical. &nbsp;Investing in thinning down cloud-init is also likely viable.</div><div><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div class="plaintext" style="white-space: pre-wrap;">  * AGREED: aim for getting python out of the fedora atomic image too,
    if all of the previous things line up.  (mattdm, 08:34:36)</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>One issue I see here is that there are a lot of valid reasons to want Python on the host for configuration management type tasks, and the answer to this is to still support local package layering on top of a base tree.</div><div><br></div><div>I'm relatively confident I can have basic package layering by Alpha.</div></div>