On Tuesday, February 26, 2019 3:32:01 AM CST Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 6:42 AM Chenxiong Qi <cqi(a)redhat.com>
> This mail is for a new micro-service called Message-Tagging-Service (aka
> MTS). It serves to tag module build triggered by specific MBS event.
> More detailed information is provided inside RFR ticket.
Thanks for working on this. In the ticket I agreed to be a sponsor for this
> MTS works with a series of predefined rules to see if a module build
> should be tagged with one or more tags. There is requirement coming from
> module maintainers to ensure a module build is tagged into correct
> platforms to fulfill the dependencies of module metadata. Comment has
> a specific use case for that.
As a packager and module maintainer I agree that currently there are
problems with tagging modules into appropriate tags. From what I heard
there are no plans for MBS to fix this and we are expected to use MTS
> So far, MTS has been containerized and deployed in internal. The image
> is available from quay.io. We would love to run MTS in Fedora as well
> in order to make it easier to manage module build tag for module
> maintainers and rel-eng.
I believe that using containers is allowed and expected these days and
that the part of RFR process that relates to having the software
packaged for EPEL 7 can be skipped.
> If anything is missed for this mail thread, please point out. Questions
> welcome! Thanks for your time.
I have a couple of questions:
1. As I understand, MTS is driven by a configuration file
(mts-rules.yaml) that specifies which modules should be tagged with
which Koji tags. Where is this configuration going to be stored?
Upstream image on quay.io? Fedora ansible.git? A different git
Technically, the rule file could be anywhere that is accessible by a HTTP GET
operation to get the content. In practice to deploy MTS to Fedora, from my
point of view, it would be good for rule maintainers to use a git repository
so that they can review every changes to the rules.
@infra and @rel-eng guys, which way do you prefer to maintain the rule file,
and what is your opinion of which git repository should be used for storing
the rule file?
2. Who is going to maintain the above rules configuration? MTS
maintainers listed in the ticket? Release engineering?
I have the same question actually. My understand of "Maintainership contacts"
is just for the service maintenance. I think rel-eng could be able to
determine which tag(s) should be applied to a specific module build.
Hopefully, rel-eng could help to maintain the content of rule file. @rel-eng,
what do you think?
3. MTS requires a Koji user (and corresponding Kerberos keytab) with
no special permissions, which it would use to tag module builds. Koji
users are managed by release engineering. Does release engineering
agree to have MTS used in Fedora? I think it would be good to open a
releng ticket for them to explicitly agree on the proposal.
I wasn't aware of this yet. I'll file an ticket to ask for agreement.
4. Do the people listed as MTS maintainers agree to sign-up for its
maintenance? It would be good if they at least acknowledged this in
@Luzi @Valerij Can you please ack in the ticket?
infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html