rel-eng February 2016

rel-eng@lists.fedoraproject.org

9 participants
66 discussions

[Fwd: Re: A modest proposal: Pungi 4 compose process (what we call composes, when we do them, what information we need about them)]
by Adam Williamson 22 Feb '16

22 Feb '16

More pontification on compose identification (subthread that didn't get cc'ed). -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net

1 0

[Fedocal] Reminder meeting : Fedora Release Engineering
by Dennis Gilmore 22 Feb '16

22 Feb '16

Dear all, You are kindly invited to the meeting: Fedora Release Engineering on 2016-02-22 from 15:30:00 to 16:30:00 UTC At fedora-meeting-1(a)irc.freenode.net The meeting will be about: Fedora Release Engineering weekly meeting Source: https://apps.fedoraproject.org/calendar/meeting/2026/

2 1

#6349: dist tag for SELinuxProject packages
by Fedora Release Engineering 21 Feb '16

21 Feb '16

#6349: dist tag for SELinuxProject packages -----------------------------+------------------------ Reporter: plautrba | Owner: rel-eng@… Type: task | Status: new Milestone: Fedora 24 Alpha | Component: koji Keywords: | Blocked By: Blocking: | -----------------------------+------------------------ Hello, I'd like to push SELinuxProject Release 2016-01-07 to Rawhide. It's available in my COPR repository - https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/plautrba/selinux/ - now. There are 8 packages which needs to be updated and they need to be built in a given order - libsepol, libselinux, setools, libsemanage, policycoreutils, checkpolicy, secilc, selinux-policy . I don't want to cause problems with unsatisfied dependencies and broken SELinux tools in Rawhide so I'd like to do it in a side tag. Could you please prepare a tag for me? -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/6349> Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng> Release Engineering for the Fedora Project

1 1

Secondary arch build changes
by Josh Boyer 19 Feb '16

19 Feb '16

Hi All, In a panel session at devconf this past weekend, Dennis mentioned some possible plans to change how secondary architectures work. Primarily, the builds for every arch included in a package's set would be required to build successfully, even if the arch is a secondary arch. However, the compose of that architecture could fail and the rest would still be pushed. I hope I summarized that correctly. That leaves me a bit confused. The major distinction from a developer's perspective today is that build failures on a secondary architecture do not fail the build on primary. The compose of a secondary architecture is even one step further removed from their workflow. With the proposed change, there is very much no distinction between primary and secondary architectures for a package maintainer. The assumption here seems to be that they can ExcludeArch a failing architecture and then resubmit the build. That is certainly possible, particularly with the proposed notification to the secondary architecture maintainers helping. However, for packages which take a significant amount of time to build in general, this is going to have an impact. Even if we assume there is no difference between arches in terms of build performance, waiting 3 or 4 hours for a build to fail because a secondary arch fails is really irritating. While it doesn't solve the overall irritation factor, I have a small suggestion. Today, if an architecture fails to build the remainder of the builds are immediately canceled. If this proposed change to koji happens, I would like to suggest we not do that. Instead, I would suggest letting all builds on the various architectures run to their natural completion and if one fails, send a failure notification on a per arch basis as soon as that task fails. This allows the maintainer to verify which arches a package builds on and which it does not. If they wish to cancel the build upon an arch failure notification, they still can do so with koji cancel. The build as a whole could still be failed, but only after all arch tasks are complete. This might not seem like an issue to most packages, but I do know that in the kernel we hit different failures on different arches at different points in a single build quite often. E.g. a driver will fail to build on arm and cancel the whole build early. Then perf will fail to build on i686 but work on x86_64, which comes much later in the build process. In a theoretical world of expanding architecture support, I very much don't want to rinse and repeat a build any more than is necessary. Allowing us to see how each arch fares individually helps avoid that problem. As an aside, I'm not fully convinced this koji change is a great idea. ExcludeArch is the hammer that will get used most to "fix" failures, and that isn't helping resolve the underlying issues. For things like the kernel, gcc, or glibc, it isn't even really an option. Yes, we can use ExcludeArch but if we do so then there is no possibility of doing a successful _useful_ compose anyway. However, maybe it won't be so bad. I prefer to focus on my suggested idea above for now, so just log this paragraph as a note of caution perhaps. josh

2 1

[Fedocal] Reminder meeting : Fedora Release Engineering
by Dennis Gilmore 14 Feb '16

14 Feb '16

Dear all, You are kindly invited to the meeting: Fedora Release Engineering on 2016-02-15 from 15:30:00 to 16:30:00 UTC At fedora-meeting-1(a)irc.freenode.net The meeting will be about: Fedora Release Engineering weekly meeting Source: https://apps.fedoraproject.org/calendar/meeting/2026/

1 0

#6312: Make Multidesktop ISO for Fedora Ambassadors North America
by Fedora Release Engineering 12 Feb '16

12 Feb '16

#6312: Make Multidesktop ISO for Fedora Ambassadors North America -----------------------------+------------------------ Reporter: nb | Owner: rel-eng@… Type: task | Status: new Milestone: Fedora 23 Final | Component: other Keywords: | Blocked By: Blocking: | -----------------------------+------------------------ FAmNA decided we will produce a DVD-9 (AKA Dual Layer DVD) with Gnome(Desktop), KDE, LXDE, XFCE, Cinnamon, and MATE-Compiz Please create an ISO with 64 bit only of those live desktops. We need this ASAP so we can get Fedora 23 media ordered. Thank you. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/6312> Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng> Release Engineering for the Fedora Project

1 12

Invitation: Fedora Release Tools Demo (Live Broadcast) @ Tue Feb 16, 2016 12pm - 1pm (acarter@redhat.com)
by Amanda Carter 12 Feb '16

12 Feb '16

You have been invited to the following event. Title: Fedora Release Tools Demo (Live Broadcast) Hangout: https://plus.google.com/events/cb6dbjdimjm7e947dt8vu9pf9us The hangout will be broadcast live & posted: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68pioEXeYvs Q&A - #fedora-meeting -- Purpose: The purpose of a demo is to show our stakeholders what we completed this iteration, get feedback from them about the changes & set some context and expectation with them about our direction. Demo agenda & previous demos can be viewed here: http://taiga.fedorainfracloud.org/project/acarter-fedora-docker-atomic-tool… Highlights today: * LiveCD builds using Pungi & LiveMedia * Pungi compose report * Outhouse prototype demo for release automation * Koji signed repos multilib support When: Tue Feb 16, 2016 12pm - 1pm Eastern Time Where: Hangout on Air / YouTube live stream Calendar: acarter(a)redhat.com Who: * acarter(a)redhat.com - organizer * rbarlow(a)redhat.com * twaugh(a)redhat.com * mmcgrath(a)redhat.com * server(a)lists.fedoraproject.org * rel-eng(a)lists.fedoraproject.org * desktop(a)lists.fedoraproject.org * kasingh(a)redhat.com * rcm-tools(a)redhat.com * sgallagh(a)redhat.com * aos-devel * cloud(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Event details: https://www.google.com/calendar/event?action=VIEW&eid=Y3RoYmg2bWpwOTQ0bzJtY… Invitation from Google Calendar: https://www.google.com/calendar/ You are receiving this courtesy email at the account rel-eng(a)lists.fedoraproject.org because you are an attendee of this event. To stop receiving future updates for this event, decline this event. Alternatively you can sign up for a Google account at https://www.google.com/calendar/ and control your notification settings for your entire calendar. Forwarding this invitation could allow any recipient to modify your RSVP response. Learn more at https://support.google.com/calendar/answer/37135#forwarding

1 0

Fedora Atomic Host Two Week Release Announcement
by noreply＠fedoraproject.org 12 Feb '16

12 Feb '16

A new update of Fedora Cloud Atomic Host has been released and can be downloaded at: Images can be found here: https://getfedora.org/en/cloud/download/atomic.html Respective signed CHECKSUM files can be found here: https://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/atomic/stable/Cloud_Atomic/x86_64/iso… Thank you, Fedora Release Engineering

2 1

[ Pay Pal ] : don't reply to this message . ✔ #ID = 52579860390086648
by Fedora Release Engineering 11 Feb '16

11 Feb '16

1 0

Fedora Atomic Two Week Release Delay
by Adam Miller 09 Feb '16

09 Feb '16

Hello all, Today we found an issue with the system that the Fedora Release Engineering Two-Week Atomic Host release automation uses to query for the latest builds that have passed testing. This is currently being looked into and we hope to have a release out tomorrow (2016-02-10). Apologies for any inconvenience this may have caused and thank you for your patience while we work through this issue. On behalf of Fedora Release Engineering, -AdamM

1 0

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

rel-eng February 2016