9:16 a.m.
dustymabe reported a new issue against the project: `atomic-wg` that you are following:
``
There is plenty of confusion still to be had around the previous form of the cloud working
group and what the atomic working group is today. This is compounded by the fact that we
still use the cloud mailing list and the #fedora-cloud IRC channel. While it may be
inconvenient for those of us that want to follow both the fedora cloud base image and the
fedora atomic group, I think it would benefit users/contributors if we more clearly
delineated between cloud and atomic.
Let's discuss/vote on using #fedora-atomic on freenode as well as the
atomic(a)lists.fedoraproject.org mailing list?
Note - The cloud base image has not gone anywhere. It will still be managed by the
cloud-sig http://pagure.io/cloud-sig.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
9:27 a.m.
jwboyer added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
To clarify, does atomic @lists.fedoraproject.org actually exist now, or would that be a
new list request? I can't find it on lists.fedoraproject.org, so I'm assuming the
latter.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
9:40 a.m.
dustymabe added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
To clarify, does atomic @lists.fedoraproject.org actually exist now,
or would that be a new list request? I can't find it on lists.fedoraproject.org, so
I'm assuming the latter.
it exists now but I would prefer people not sign up for the list until we make a decision.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
9:45 a.m.
walters added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
There was a discussion before about moving Cloud Base under Server; that makes some sense
to me. Then we could cleanly close the cloud@ list and really in general stop talking
about Cloud. Discussion for Project Atomic moves to `@atomic`, cloud base moves to
`server@`.
If one views Cloud as "traditional dnf" or "not containerized",
it's very quickly going to run up against the Modularity reality and hence what Server
is doing.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
10:02 a.m.
dustymabe added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
There was a discussion before about moving Cloud Base under Server;
that makes some sense to me. Then we could cleanly close the cloud@ list and really in
general stop talking about Cloud, which reduces confusion. Discussion for Project Atomic
moves to @atomic, cloud base moves to server@.
those discussions mostly stopped as we don't see much reason to change the cloud base
image from what it currently is - a reasonable base for bootstrapping whatever cloud
server you may want to run. The cloud-sig will be a smaller group of people, but with a
goal of delivering a base image in the same way we have been doing in the past:
http://pagure.io/cloud-sig.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
10:02 a.m.
jwboyer added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
To clarify, does atomic @lists.fedoraproject.org actually exist now, or would that be a
new list request? I can't find it on lists.fedoraproject.org, so I'm assuming the
latter.
it exists now but I would prefer people not sign up for the list until we make a
decision.
Yeah, I found it with some more digging. Hyperkitty is not... helpful.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
12:13 p.m.
jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
+1
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
12:14 p.m.
yzhang added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
Makes sense, +1
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
12:14 p.m.
miabbott added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
+1
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
12:15 p.m.
jzb added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
+1
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
12:16 p.m.
maxamillion added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
I'm +1 to this
Also note, that I created `atomic(a)lists.fedoraproject.org` months ago and discussed it at
one of the meetings but we never really moved over. It's there, it's just
"inactive" because there's been zero email to it so the Hyperkitty webUI
hides it by default in the UI.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
12:25 p.m.
sinnykumari added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
+1 . A common place to discuss anything related to Fedora Atomic
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
12:50 p.m.
jberkus added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
I am opposed to both having a new list and especially to having a new IRC channel.
Let me explain the main reason for my opposition, followed by some detail on IRC vs. ML.
A lot of the container audience is new developers and devops people. These folks
generally prefer not to use "antiquated" media like email and IRC at all (mostly
they use slack and github issues). We really want to reach this sector as users and
potential contributors. It's bad enough that we're asking them to join a mailing
list or an IRC channel at all; asking them to join *multiple* lists and channels is an
automatic "Forget it, I'll use something else".
Now, for the IRC channel, it's a fact today that #fedora-cloud and #atomic are used
almost interchangeably by the contributors to Atomic Host and its underlying tech.
I've seen CAH, CLI and rpm-ostree discussions on #fedora-cloud, and I've seen
Fedora Atomic build discussions on #atomic. Given that, we should stop confusing new
users and simply have One Big Channel with all things Atomic, which would be channel
#atomic.
The mailing list is more complicated. If you look at the traffic on
cloud(a)lists.fedoraproject, you'll see that 80% of the traffic is automated notices of
some kind. My proposal is that we:
a. Move all *discussion* traffic to atomic-devel(a)projectatomic.io
b. Create a new list, atomic(a)list.fp, which is exclusively for automated notices
While this seems like a fine difference from Dusty's proposal, the distinction is
important. Again, like #atomic, there is no clear distinction between what discussion
belongs on atomic-devel vs. cloud@fedora, and as a result discussions end up getting
crossed over or sent to both. This is very confusing to new community participants,
especially if they're only subscribed to one of the lists.
Second, by making the list split discussion vs. notices, we allow people to join in the
discussion without requiring them to receive all of the automated notices.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
1:13 p.m.
mattdm added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
I don't think we want to direct all Fedora-related Atomic development discussion to
projectatomic.io -- I don't think that's very discoverable for people in the
Fedora community and will lead to confusion about 1) Fedora Atomic Host as an Edition and
2) whether Fedora community people in general are welcome to participate or need to go
through some special hoops. I think it will decrease participation from areas like Docs,
Marketing, and Ambassadors, right when we need to build that up.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
1:27 p.m.
dustymabe added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
I am opposed to both having a new list and especially to having a new
IRC channel.
Let me explain the main reason for my opposition, followed by some
detail on IRC vs. ML.
A lot of the container audience is new developers and devops people.
These folks generally prefer not to use "antiquated" media like email and IRC at
all (mostly they use slack and github issues). We really want to reach this sector as
users and potential contributors. It's bad enough that we're asking them to join
a mailing list or an IRC channel at all; asking them to join multiple lists and channels
is an automatic "Forget it, I'll use something else".
damn kids - honestly whatever channel they want to join would have someone in it who could
help them. Maybe #fedora-atomic can just have discussions related to atomic +
releng/infra.
Now, for the IRC channel, it's a fact today that #fedora-cloud
and #atomic are used almost interchangeably by the contributors to Atomic Host and its
underlying tech. I've seen CAH, CLI and rpm-ostree discussions on #fedora-cloud, and
I've seen Fedora Atomic build discussions on #atomic. Given that, we should stop
confusing new users and simply have One Big Channel with all things Atomic, which would be
channel #atomic.
Yeah honestly people move around when there is more than one conversation going on at a
time. That's probably why you've seen cross talk. Having one big channel
wouldn't help that.
The mailing list is more complicated. If you look at the traffic on
cloud @lists.fedoraproject, you'll see that 80% of the traffic is automated notices of
some kind. My proposal is that we:
a. Move all discussion traffic to atomic-devel @projectatomic.io
b. Create a new list, atomic @list.fp, which is exclusively for automated notices
I guess something like that could work. I don't really think it makes things any less
confusing to users than if we had the same setup we do today but with
s/fedora-cloud/fedora-atomic.
While this seems like a fine difference from Dusty's proposal,
the distinction is important. Again, like #atomic, there is no clear distinction between
what discussion belongs on atomic-devel vs. cloud @fedora, and as a result discussions end
up getting crossed over or sent to both. This is very confusing to new community
participants, especially if they're only subscribed to one of the lists.
I completely agree with you for atomic-devel vs fedora-cloud, but atomic-devel vs
fedora-atomic would be something like this:
fedora-atomic: anything fedora specific (i.e. *enable gpg sig verification in Fedora 26*
or *enable mirroring ostree content*)
atomic-devel: anything not fedora specific (i.e. *rpm-ostree livefs new feature* or *PAPR
project for pull request testing*)
Second, by making the list split discussion vs. notices, we allow
people to join in the discussion without requiring them to receive all of the automated
notices.
TBH the issue tracker is where we are having discussions these days. I don't tend to
go back to old mailing list discussions and fire it back up. Usually I try to link to a
mailing list disucssion from/to an issue tracker to prove a point and then continue
discussion there or do associated work, etc..
I'm not opposed to your proposal. Just want to voice my concerns.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
1:37 p.m.
jberkus added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
@dustymabe, @mattdm
One question is, "if a new participant/user/fedora packager wants to start a
discussion about Fedora Atomic, where do we direct them?" If we can answer that, we
can decide what to do with the mailing lists.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
1:44 p.m.
dustymabe added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
"if a new participant/user/fedora packager wants to start a
discussion about Fedora Atomic, where do we direct them?"
since you asked that specific question, I would say `atomic(a)lists.fp.o`.
If you had asked a different question the answer might be different. I honestly don't
think there is a magic answer to solving confusion everywhere on this front, but do think
the existing setup where we re-use *cloud* assets needs to change.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
10:54 a.m.
jberkus added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
... but what if their question is actually about rpm-ostree, or the Atomic CLI, once we
get the details? Then we have to shunt them to another list. This is a bad experience
for people new to the community. do you follow?
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
11:05 a.m.
dustymabe added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
... but what if their question is actually about rpm-ostree, or the
Atomic CLI, once we get the details? Then we have to shunt them to another list. This is
a bad experience for people new to the community. do you follow?
What do you do if someone asks a question on the `atomic` mailing list that should have
been asked on `atomic-devel` ? By your same reasoning these two mailing lists should be
combined as well, unless I am missing something.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
11:10 a.m.
jberkus added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
Given the level of traffic on atomic@, those could be combined, frankly. And I think it
would get questions on atomic@ answered faster.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
11:33 a.m.
mattdm added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
So, thinking back to "These folks generally prefer not to use "antiquated"
media like email and IRC at all", maybe the answer is _not a mailing list at all_?
I've been thinking of spinning up Discourse instance in OpenShift (either the Fedora
instance or OpenShift Online) to replace Ask, and maybe we could use a second one for
this.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
11:44 a.m.
jberkus added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
@mattdm well, the contributors use email, so we need *something* for them to use.
Or do we? I'm going to do an examination of traffic on cloud@. I'm willing to
bet that I'll find out that 90% of the traffic is automated messages. Given that, we
could have those messages go pretty much *anywhere*.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
11:54 a.m.
jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
The atomic-specific bits of each atomic host are very close. The questions relating to
each, including things like enabling gpg sig verification or mirroring ostree content,
generally apply to both centos and fedora atomic. You can run centos or fedora-based
containers on both hosts, rpm ostree issues apply to both, etc.
I really like the idea of bringing our "atomic" communities closer together, of
having a main place to hang out and field q's that's more focused.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
12:04 p.m.
jberkus added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
So for the last month, we have only two threads which were NOT automated messages (and in
the meantime, over 100 automated messages). One was Stef's CI/CD question (which
arguably should have been a Pagure issue, and could just as easily have been on
atomic-devel@), and the other was one call for contianer review (which got no responses).
So the reality is we have two media for communication in the project: IRC, and Pagure
issues. The mailing list is NOT used for discussion, materially. So when we're
talking about the list, we're really asking "where do automated messages
go". And if that's the question, the answer *is* atomic(a)lists.fp.org.
However, also based on that evidence, I assert that we should be telling people:
discussion and support questions should go to atomic-devel@pa OR should be filed as issues
on pagure, because that's where they'll get responses.
Hence my proposal, above.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
12:06 p.m.
jberkus added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
I'll also point out that https://getfedora.org/en/atomic/download/ already directs
people to atomic(a)pa.io and #atomic. This isn't something I changed; it's how it
was before I started working on Fedora Atomic.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
1:28 p.m.
jberkus added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
Revised proposal based on discussion on #fedora-cloud:
Mailing Lists:
* atomic(a)lists.fedoraproject.org gets created. This list is for all automated messages
and cc'd on announcements. It is not a discussion list; discussions on it will be
either (a) cc'd to atomic-devel or (b) redirected to a pagure issue as appropriate.
* atomic-devel(a)projectatomic.io will be used for all mailing list discussions.
IRC:
* all discussions of general topics around Fedora Atomic, including contents,
containerized kube, container reviews, ostree changes, etc, etc. will be on #atomic.
* discussions and troubleshooting Fedora build pipeline/releng (bodhi, punji, etc.) for
Atomic will be on the new channel #fedora-atomic. Content discussions which start there
will get re-directed to #atomic.
Works for everyone?
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
1:40 p.m.
dustymabe added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
Revised proposal based on discussion on #fedora-cloud:
known as jberkus' proposal
+1 to jberkus' proposal
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
2:04 p.m.
jzb added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
+1 to jberkus' proposal.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
2:45 p.m.
jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
+1 to jberkus' proposal.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
12:20 p.m.
sinnykumari added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
+1 to jberkus' proposal.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
12:20 p.m.
maxamillion added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
+1 to jberkus' proposal. :thumbsup:
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
12:21 p.m.
roshi added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
+1 to the @jberkus proposal
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
1:02 p.m.
jlebon added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
discussions and troubleshooting Fedora build pipeline/releng (bodhi,
punji, etc.) for Atomic will be on the new channel #fedora-atomic. Content discussions
which start there will get re-directed to #atomic.
Sorry if I'm missing context from the IRC #fedora-cloud convo, but isn't the
proper place for those discussions in #fedora-releng? Is it worth having a separate
channel just for FAH releng? If that's really the case, then maybe the channel should
be called #fah-releng instead. Calling it "fedora-atomic" invites discussions
that should probably happen in #atomic by the proposal.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
1:04 p.m.
jberkus added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
@jlebon that was suggested, but @dustymabe really wanted a separate channel, and nobody
argued against it.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
1:18 p.m.
dustymabe added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
Sorry if I'm missing context from the IRC #fedora-cloud convo,
but isn't the proper place for those discussions in #fedora-releng? Is it worth having
a separate channel just for FAH releng? If that's really the case, then maybe the
channel should be called #fah-releng instead. Calling it "fedora-atomic" invites
discussions that should probably happen in #atomic by the proposal.
The topic in #fedora-atomic points people towards #atomic and we can monitor what goes on
in there to try to make sure discussions happen in the right place.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
1:25 p.m.
dustymabe added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
Discussion in the meeting today and votes in the ticket means we are approving
jberkus' proposal. the [mailing
list](https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/atomic.lists.fedoraproj... has
been created and the irc channel (#fedora-atomic) exists.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/295
2473
days inactive
2486
days old
35 comments
13 participants
participants (13)
-
Adam Miller -
Colin Walters
-
Dusty Mabe
-
Jason Brooks
-
Joe Brockmeier
-
Jonathan Lebon
-
Josh Berkus
-
Josh Boyer
-
Matthew Miller
-
Micah Abbott
-
Mike Ruckman
-
Sinny Kumari
-
Yu Qi Zhang