5:59 p.m.
Hi All,
We have just less than 3 months before the F21 Alpha change deadline
comes. That means that now is the time to get going in earnest on
making sure we have all the things we want lined up for the initial
release of Workstation done. Matthias and Christian have done a great
job of getting us started, and have gotten some major Changes
approved. The GNOME 3.12 rebase was accepted, and the enabling of
SCLs should go over fairly well once the questions are addressed.
So what is left? Off the top of my head I can think of:
1) Getting the kickstart for Workstation cleaned up with the
appropriate package lists (I'd be willing to get this rolling)
2) Integrating KDE into the above in whatever form we work out with the KDE team
3) KDE variant of Adwaita theme
4) Firewall/firewalld integration issues
5) Installation and compose methods work with rel-eng (live image
default, but install tree necessary for compose. PXE/netboot iso?
etc)
I'm sure I'm missing a few things here. Please chime in with what I'm
forgetting. In short, there's more than enough work to go around.
Lastly, we've been rather quiet as a WG as of late. The Cloud WG is
going through a confirmation process with their members to make sure
people are still interested and willing to do work. That's not a bad
idea for ourselves. WG members, please take the time to reply with
whether or not you wish to remain a WG member.
As an aside, much of the "heavy lifting" in terms of process is done
for this release. The PRD and Tech Specs have been approved, and the
initial round of Changes are submitted. Not being overly familiar
with the underlying code in much of the DE stacks, my participation
has been limited mostly to those kinds of process things. I think we
still have some discussions to have on process and interactions with
other groups, but I thought I would double check that the WG feels I'm
doing a decent job representing them in this capacity. I'm happy to
continue to pitch in where I can, but if the WG feels they'd be better
served by someone else as the FESCo liaison, please speak up.
josh
8:08 a.m.
----- Original Message -----
Subject: Workstation status and TODOs
Hi All,
We have just less than 3 months before the F21 Alpha change deadline
comes. That means that now is the time to get going in earnest on
making sure we have all the things we want lined up for the initial
release of Workstation done. Matthias and Christian have done a great
job of getting us started, and have gotten some major Changes
approved. The GNOME 3.12 rebase was accepted, and the enabling of
SCLs should go over fairly well once the questions are addressed.
So what is left? Off the top of my head I can think of:
1) Getting the kickstart for Workstation cleaned up with the
appropriate package lists (I'd be willing to get this rolling)
Thanks for taking the lead on this.
2) Integrating KDE into the above in whatever form we work out with
the KDE
team
I am heading off on vacation for 2 weeks tomorrow, but maybe Matthias and
Lukas and own this one?
3) KDE variant of Adwaita theme
Still working on sorting out
the staffing to take this on. Should hopefully have some progress soon.
4) Firewall/firewalld integration issues
Had a call with the
firewalld devs late last week. Will send out the meeting notes to the fedora-desktop list
today.
5) Installation and compose methods work with rel-eng (live image
default, but install tree necessary for compose. PXE/netboot iso?
etc)
Anyone who can take this on? Maybe Kalev?
I'm sure I'm missing a few things here. Please chime in with
what I'm
forgetting. In short, there's more than enough work to go around.
Lastly, we've been rather quiet as a WG as of late. The Cloud WG is
going through a confirmation process with their members to make sure
people are still interested and willing to do work. That's not a bad
idea for ourselves. WG members, please take the time to reply with
whether or not you wish to remain a WG member.
I do, and I do think that we need to
find a better way to function as a
working group. I take part of the blame here for not pushing more on
this myself. Maybe we should try to structure our work like FeSCO? Since
the plan is for the working groups to replace many of the functions of
FeSCO then this would maybe be a good model?
Christian
As an aside, much of the "heavy lifting" in terms of
process is done
for this release. The PRD and Tech Specs have been approved, and the
initial round of Changes are submitted. Not being overly familiar
with the underlying code in much of the DE stacks, my participation
has been limited mostly to those kinds of process things. I think we
still have some discussions to have on process and interactions with
other groups, but I thought I would double check that the WG feels I'm
doing a decent job representing them in this capacity. I'm happy to
continue to pitch in where I can, but if the WG feels they'd be better
served by someone else as the FESCo liaison, please speak up.
josh
9:27 a.m.
On 04/29/2014 03:08 PM, Christian Schaller wrote:
> 5) Installation and compose methods work with rel-eng (live
image
> default, but install tree necessary for compose. PXE/netboot iso?
> etc)
Anyone who can take this on? Maybe Kalev?
Sure, happy to take this on.
> I'm sure I'm missing a few things here. Please chime in
with what I'm
> forgetting. In short, there's more than enough work to go around.
>
> Lastly, we've been rather quiet as a WG as of late. The Cloud WG is
> going through a confirmation process with their members to make sure
> people are still interested and willing to do work. That's not a bad
> idea for ourselves. WG members, please take the time to reply with
> whether or not you wish to remain a WG member.
I do, and I do think that we need to find a better way to function as a
working group. I take part of the blame here for not pushing more on
this myself. Maybe we should try to structure our work like FeSCO? Since
the plan is for the working groups to replace many of the functions of
FeSCO then this would maybe be a good model?
I am interested in continuing as well.
Regarding the perceived quietness, I can think of two things:
One is that the #fedora-workstation irc channel isn't working very well
since everybody is using the #fedora-desktop channel instead for
everyday communication. Might make sense to officially ditch
#fedora-workstation?
Another thing that makes it seem quiet is that we don't have regular
weekly meetings. Other teams are doing those and it seems to be a good
way to show the world what is going on in the WG -- with meeting status
reports and all that stuff.
--
Kalev
9:31 a.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kalev Lember" <kalevlember(a)gmail.com>
To: "Christian Schaller" <cschalle(a)redhat.com>, "Josh Boyer"
<jwboyer(a)fedoraproject.org>
Cc: "Discussions about development for the Fedora desktop"
<desktop(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>, "Matthias Clasen"
<mclasen(a)redhat.com>, "Christoph Wickert"
<cwickert(a)fedoraproject.org>, "Lukáš Tinkl" <ltinkl(a)redhat.com>,
"Owen
Taylor" <otaylor(a)redhat.com>, "Jens Petersen"
<petersen(a)redhat.com>, "Ryan Lerch" <rlerch(a)redhat.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2014 4:27:48 PM
Subject: Re: Workstation status and TODOs
On 04/29/2014 03:08 PM, Christian Schaller wrote:
>> 5) Installation and compose methods work with rel-eng (live image
>> default, but install tree necessary for compose. PXE/netboot iso?
>> etc)
> Anyone who can take this on? Maybe Kalev?
Sure, happy to take this on.
>> I'm sure I'm missing a few things here. Please chime in with what
I'm
>> forgetting. In short, there's more than enough work to go around.
>>
>> Lastly, we've been rather quiet as a WG as of late. The Cloud WG is
>> going through a confirmation process with their members to make sure
>> people are still interested and willing to do work. That's not a bad
>> idea for ourselves. WG members, please take the time to reply with
>> whether or not you wish to remain a WG member.
> I do, and I do think that we need to find a better way to function as a
> working group. I take part of the blame here for not pushing more on
> this myself. Maybe we should try to structure our work like FeSCO? Since
> the plan is for the working groups to replace many of the functions of
> FeSCO then this would maybe be a good model?
I am interested in continuing as well.
Regarding the perceived quietness, I can think of two things:
One is that the #fedora-workstation irc channel isn't working very well
since everybody is using the #fedora-desktop channel instead for
everyday communication. Might make sense to officially ditch
#fedora-workstation?
Another thing that makes it seem quiet is that we don't have regular
weekly meetings. Other teams are doing those and it seems to be a good
way to show the world what is going on in the WG -- with meeting status
reports and all that stuff.
If I remember correctly the reason the workstation channel was established was to have
the channel on the same IRC server as the rest of the working group channels,
since the fedora-desktop channel is on Gimpnet.
Christian
9:35 a.m.
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 10:27 AM, Kalev Lember <kalevlember(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 04/29/2014 03:08 PM, Christian Schaller wrote:
>> 5) Installation and compose methods work with rel-eng (live image
>> default, but install tree necessary for compose. PXE/netboot iso?
>> etc)
> Anyone who can take this on? Maybe Kalev?
Sure, happy to take this on.
>> I'm sure I'm missing a few things here. Please chime in with what
I'm
>> forgetting. In short, there's more than enough work to go around.
>>
>> Lastly, we've been rather quiet as a WG as of late. The Cloud WG is
>> going through a confirmation process with their members to make sure
>> people are still interested and willing to do work. That's not a bad
>> idea for ourselves. WG members, please take the time to reply with
>> whether or not you wish to remain a WG member.
> I do, and I do think that we need to find a better way to function as a
> working group. I take part of the blame here for not pushing more on
> this myself. Maybe we should try to structure our work like FeSCO? Since
> the plan is for the working groups to replace many of the functions of
> FeSCO then this would maybe be a good model?
I am interested in continuing as well.
Regarding the perceived quietness, I can think of two things:
One is that the #fedora-workstation irc channel isn't working very well
since everybody is using the #fedora-desktop channel instead for
everyday communication. Might make sense to officially ditch
#fedora-workstation?
We could. I have no attachment to it personally, but the existing
#fedora-desktop has it's own historical user set and it's on a
different IRC server from the rest of the Fedora channels.
Another thing that makes it seem quiet is that we don't have
regular
weekly meetings. Other teams are doing those and it seems to be a good
way to show the world what is going on in the WG -- with meeting status
reports and all that stuff.
Right. Christian suggested using more of a FESCo model, which would
mean regular meetings (perhaps every-other week?) and possibly a trac
instance to track work items. Originally we avoided this overhead
because the intention was to "Get stuff done", but in hindsight that's
lead to a lack of transparency and accountability.
Unless there are major objections or helpful other suggestions, I'll
work with the Fedora infrastructure team to get a trac instance setup
and we can work out meetings shortly. (I hate trac, but there's no
better solution that I'm aware of.)
josh
9:52 a.m.
> Another thing that makes it seem quiet is that we don't have
regular
> weekly meetings. Other teams are doing those and it seems to be a good
> way to show the world what is going on in the WG -- with meeting status
> reports and all that stuff.
+1
Right. Christian suggested using more of a FESCo model, which would
mean regular meetings (perhaps every-other week?) and possibly a trac
instance to track work items.
Sounds good
Jens
10:18 a.m.
On Tue 29 Apr 2014 10:52:09 AM EDT, Jens Petersen wrote:
>> Another thing that makes it seem quiet is that we don't
have regular
>> weekly meetings. Other teams are doing those and it seems to be a good
>> way to show the world what is going on in the WG -- with meeting status
>> reports and all that stuff.
+1
> Right. Christian suggested using more of a FESCo model, which would
> mean regular meetings (perhaps every-other week?) and possibly a trac
> instance to track work items.
Sounds good
Jens
I'm still keen to be involved.
Would love to kick-start some user reviews to try to determine if our
goals in the PRD are being met.
cheers,
ryanlerch
10:25 a.m.
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 10:35:48AM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
Unless there are major objections or helpful other suggestions,
I'll
work with the Fedora infrastructure team to get a trac instance setup
and we can work out meetings shortly. (I hate trac, but there's no
better solution that I'm aware of.)
That's exactly why we're using trac in the cloud WG. It's bad, but we have
it available, and anything better is going to be significant work which
detracts from the actual... work.
I have a dream of moving to Cantas (an open source Trello-inspired kanban
card program) but... again, work.
--
Matthew Miller -- Fedora Project -- <mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
"Tepid change for the somewhat better!"
7:53 a.m.
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 10:52 AM, Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> > Another thing that makes it seem quiet is that we don't
have regular
> > weekly meetings. Other teams are doing those and it seems to be a good
> > way to show the world what is going on in the WG -- with meeting status
> > reports and all that stuff.
+1
> Right. Christian suggested using more of a FESCo model, which would
> mean regular meetings (perhaps every-other week?) and possibly a trac
> instance to track work items.
Sounds good
OK, I had a trac instance set up for us last week. You can access it here:
https://fedorahosted.org/workstation/
The WG members should be automatically CC'd. If not, I'll try and fix that.
josh
5:15 p.m.
On 04/29/2014 04:27 PM, Kalev Lember wrote:
On 04/29/2014 03:08 PM, Christian Schaller wrote:
>> 5) Installation and compose methods work with rel-eng (live image
>> default, but install tree necessary for compose. PXE/netboot iso?
>> etc)
> Anyone who can take this on? Maybe Kalev?
Sure, happy to take this on.
I quick update:
I talked to releng about this today and they would like to keep the PXE
and boot.iso to support network installs.
We also had a bit of back and forth about the old DVD installer [1] but
agreed on dropping it in the end. According to dgilmore, "dropping the
dvd before final should be fine" but it requires some pungi work to
actually not generate it.
This leaves the live image as the main Workstation deliverable.
--
[1] The "old DVD installer" here means the DVD image that supports
package selection, as opposed to a "live image" that copies the whole
image to the disk.
--
Kalev
3574
days inactive
3648
days old
desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org
9 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
Christian Schaller -
Jens-Ulrik Petersen -
Josh Boyer -
Kalev Lember -
Matthew Miller -
Ryan Lerch