11:51 a.m.
I'm not sure if I missed this discussion or not, but what is going to happen
to kadischi now that pilgrim is the "default" or "chosen" tool for
Fedora
live-cd generation. Will this project contiue or will it merge with pungi
and pilgrim.
6:37 a.m.
Ahm ed wrote:
I'm not sure if I missed this discussion or not, but what is
going to
happen to kadischi now that pilgrim is the "default" or "chosen" tool
for Fedora live-cd generation. Will this project contiue or will it
merge with pungi and pilgrim.
Pilgrim is being pursued for reasons outlined in
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FedoraSummit/LiveCD. Anyone interested in
continuing to develop Kadischi can certainly do so. It is GPL'ed after
all. Consider it a merge otherwise.
Rahul
11:25 a.m.
On Mon, 2006-12-04 at 18:07 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Ahm ed wrote:
> I'm not sure if I missed this discussion or not, but what is going to
> happen to kadischi now that pilgrim is the "default" or "chosen"
tool
> for Fedora live-cd generation. Will this project contiue or will it
> merge with pungi and pilgrim.
Pilgrim is being pursued for reasons outlined in
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FedoraSummit/LiveCD. Anyone interested in
continuing to develop Kadischi can certainly do so. It is GPL'ed after
all. Consider it a merge otherwise.
I walked away from the summit with the understanding that we were going
to pursue integrating pilgrim and pungi for our official livecds. But
the Kadischi code would stay separate and Jaspar Hartline volunteered to
be the maintainer which did not have any unfavorable reactions. What
piece of the discussion led you to think of it as a merge? (I was only
on IRC for this portion of things so I might have missed out on
something.)
It would be highly beneficial for Kadischi and pilgrim to remain
unmerged. They are two very different tools which aim to address two
separate corners of the liveCD creation audience.
-Toshio
12:24 p.m.
Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
On Mon, 2006-12-04 at 18:07 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Ahm ed wrote:
>> I'm not sure if I missed this discussion or not, but what is going to
>> happen to kadischi now that pilgrim is the "default" or
"chosen" tool
>> for Fedora live-cd generation. Will this project contiue or will it
>> merge with pungi and pilgrim.
> Pilgrim is being pursued for reasons outlined in
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FedoraSummit/LiveCD. Anyone interested in
> continuing to develop Kadischi can certainly do so. It is GPL'ed after
> all. Consider it a merge otherwise.
I walked away from the summit with the understanding that we were going
to pursue integrating pilgrim and pungi for our official livecds. But
the Kadischi code would stay separate and Jaspar Hartline volunteered to
be the maintainer which did not have any unfavorable reactions. What
piece of the discussion led you to think of it as a merge? (I was only
on IRC for this portion of things so I might have missed out on
something.)
It would be highly beneficial for Kadischi and pilgrim to remain
unmerged. They are two very different tools which aim to address two
separate corners of the liveCD creation audience.
As of now, I dont see anyone developing Kadischi further. I dont think
there is separate niches for both tools. I would prefer a single tool to
cover all the needs of people who want to create Live CD's.
Functionality wise, I consider that a merge.
Rahul
2:26 p.m.
On Mon, 2006-12-04 at 23:54 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-12-04 at 18:07 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>> Ahm ed wrote:
>>> I'm not sure if I missed this discussion or not, but what is going to
>>> happen to kadischi now that pilgrim is the "default" or
"chosen" tool
>>> for Fedora live-cd generation. Will this project contiue or will it
>>> merge with pungi and pilgrim.
>> Pilgrim is being pursued for reasons outlined in
>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FedoraSummit/LiveCD. Anyone interested in
>> continuing to develop Kadischi can certainly do so. It is GPL'ed after
>> all. Consider it a merge otherwise.
>
> I walked away from the summit with the understanding that we were going
> to pursue integrating pilgrim and pungi for our official livecds. But
> the Kadischi code would stay separate and Jaspar Hartline volunteered to
> be the maintainer which did not have any unfavorable reactions. What
> piece of the discussion led you to think of it as a merge? (I was only
> on IRC for this portion of things so I might have missed out on
> something.)
>
> It would be highly beneficial for Kadischi and pilgrim to remain
> unmerged. They are two very different tools which aim to address two
> separate corners of the liveCD creation audience.
>
As of now, I dont see anyone developing Kadischi further. I dont think
there is separate niches for both tools. I would prefer a single tool to
cover all the needs of people who want to create Live CD's.
Functionality wise, I consider that a merge.
Jasper has repeatedly stated that he is continuing to work on Kadischi.
I asked him today and he confirmed that this is true. Asserting that
Kadischi is not being developed is a disservice to the community who is
using it and the people that are maintaining it.
The reason there are separate niches is that Kadischi is dead simple to
use for one-offs while pilgrim is easier to use for developing more
official livecds.
If I'm a college student with a Fedora Core install set, I can create a
custom livecd with Kadischi very easily. It reuses anaconda, an
interface that I have already been exposed to when I installed Fedora on
the machine and is able to quickly create a livecd image for me.
OTOH, if I'm spinning the official Fedora Livecd or otherwise want to
create reproducible, scripted builds to which I can make incremental
changes until I have something I'm ready to distribute, pilgrim makes a
lot of sense. It has a commandline oriented, edit-the-package-list to
create an install mentality. Kadischi has scriptability through
anaconda's kickstart which can serve this purpose but IMHO pilgrim's
inheritable package lists are a nicer interface for people who haven't
used kickstart before.
-Toshio
2:35 p.m.
Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>
Jasper has repeatedly stated that he is continuing to work on Kadischi.
I asked him today and he confirmed that this is true. Asserting that
Kadischi is not being developed is a disservice to the community who is
using it and the people that are maintaining it.
I meant in terms of roadmaps and development discussions happening here
but I wont argue about that. I have already stated that if its being
developed independently, it can be.
The reason there are separate niches is that Kadischi is dead simple
to
use for one-offs while pilgrim is easier to use for developing more
official livecds.
If I'm a college student with a Fedora Core install set, I can create a
custom livecd with Kadischi very easily. It reuses anaconda, an
interface that I have already been exposed to when I installed Fedora on
the machine and is able to quickly create a livecd image for me.
OTOH, if I'm spinning the official Fedora Livecd or otherwise want to
create reproducible, scripted builds to which I can make incremental
changes until I have something I'm ready to distribute, pilgrim makes a
lot of sense. It has a commandline oriented, edit-the-package-list to
create an install mentality.
You are describing the current implementation as some sort of design
decision.
Kadischi has scriptability through
anaconda's kickstart which can serve this purpose but IMHO
pilgrim's
inheritable package lists are a nicer interface for people who haven't
used kickstart before.
There is no fundamental reason any single tool cant be easy enough to
serve all the needs of Live CD users. I suspect the feature sets are
going to converge based on the needs of users.
Rahul
5:42 p.m.
On 12/4/06, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
Jasper has repeatedly stated that he is continuing to work on
Kadischi.
I asked him today and he confirmed that this is true. Asserting that
Kadischi is not being developed is a disservice to the community who is
using it and the people that are maintaining it.
Sorry, to land like this and didn't say it before, due to lack of time
and new interesting tools were brought forward, I'm withdrawing myself
from the Kadischi project.
Though, I'll have a look soon at pungi+pilgrim and possibly help with
the development.
chitlesh
--
http://clunixchit.blogspot.com
9:40 a.m.
On Mon, 4 Dec 2006, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
As of now, I dont see anyone developing Kadischi further. I dont
think there
is separate niches for both tools. I would prefer a single tool to cover all
the needs of people who want to create Live CD's. Functionality wise, I
consider that a merge.
I don't think this distinction is helpful.
Here's the deal. Kadischi has always been open to further development,
and will always be open to further development. The problem with Kadischi
has been, for a long time now, that no one was stepping up to take serious
ownership/leadership of the project.
That's the biggest single problem we're looking to solve by moving to
Pilgrim. If a huge community should happen to grow up around Kadischi, I
have absolutely no problem with that. At all. Zero. I encourage it, in
fact.
But Pilgrim is where the internal Red Hat momentum is, for a number of
reasons. My bet is that Pilgrim will improve quickly and dramatically, in
a way that Kadischi never has.
If you have specific reasons for developing Kadischi, continue to develop
and use Kadischi. But unless you work some serious mojo, Pilgrim will be
much stronger in three months. That's just the facts, as I see it.
--g
-------------------------------------------------------------
Greg DeKoenigsberg || Fedora Project || fedoraproject.org
Be an Ambassador || http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Ambassadors
-------------------------------------------------------------
5:21 p.m.
On Mon, 4 Dec 2006, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
On Mon, 2006-12-04 at 18:07 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Ahm ed wrote:
>> I'm not sure if I missed this discussion or not, but what is going to
>> happen to kadischi now that pilgrim is the "default" or
"chosen" tool
>> for Fedora live-cd generation. Will this project contiue or will it
>> merge with pungi and pilgrim.
>
> Pilgrim is being pursued for reasons outlined in
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FedoraSummit/LiveCD. Anyone interested in
> continuing to develop Kadischi can certainly do so. It is GPL'ed after
> all. Consider it a merge otherwise.
I walked away from the summit with the understanding that we were going
to pursue integrating pilgrim and pungi for our official livecds. But
the Kadischi code would stay separate and Jaspar Hartline volunteered to
be the maintainer which did not have any unfavorable reactions. What
piece of the discussion led you to think of it as a merge? (I was only
on IRC for this portion of things so I might have missed out on
something.)
It would be highly beneficial for Kadischi and pilgrim to remain
unmerged. They are two very different tools which aim to address two
separate corners of the liveCD creation audience.
+1
I consider to see them as separate projects. Pungi+Pilgrim will produce
the "official" LiveCD.
--g
-------------------------------------------------------------
Greg DeKoenigsberg || Fedora Project || fedoraproject.org
Be an Ambassador || http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Ambassadors
-------------------------------------------------------------
6360
days inactive
6364
days old
livecd@lists.fedoraproject.org
8 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
Ahm ed -
Chitlesh GOORAH -
Greg DeKoenigsberg -
Rahul Sundaram -
Toshio Kuratomi