[pungi-fedora] PR #686: Don't build Atomic Host in F30 and onward in the favor of FCOS

[Sinny Kumari]

sinnykumari opened a new pull-request against the project: `pungi-fedora` that you are
following:
``
Don't build Atomic Host in F30 and onward in the favor of FCOS
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/pungi-fedora/pull-request/686

[Sinny Kumari]

sinnykumari commented on the pull-request: `Don't build Atomic Host in F30 and onward
in the favor of FCOS` that you are following:
``
@dustymabe 
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/pungi-fedora/pull-request/686

[Dusty Mabe]

dustymabe commented on the pull-request: `Don't build Atomic Host in F30 and onward in
the favor of FCOS` that you are following:
``
typo `s--variant` 
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/pungi-fedora/pull-request/686

[Dusty Mabe]

dustymabe commented on the pull-request: `Don't build Atomic Host in F30 and onward in
the favor of FCOS` that you are following:
``
one typo that I see. otherwise LGTM
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/pungi-fedora/pull-request/686

[Sinny Kumari]

sinnykumari commented on the pull-request: `Don't build Atomic Host in F30 and onward
in the favor of FCOS` that you are following:
``
Thanks for catching the typo, fixed it.
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/pungi-fedora/pull-request/686

[Dusty Mabe]

dustymabe commented on the pull-request: `Don't build Atomic Host in F30 and onward in
the favor of FCOS` that you are following:
``
LGTM
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/pungi-fedora/pull-request/686

[Adam Williamson]

adamwill commented on the pull-request: `Don't build Atomic Host in F30 and onward in
the favor of FCOS` that you are following:
``
Is this really appropriate to do *right now* given that we don't apparently have FCOS
as part of the official compose process at all right now, and the line at Devconf was that
it's very early? Are we sure it's going to be ready to ship as part of F30, or
that we're fine with F30 having neither if it isn't?
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/pungi-fedora/pull-request/686

[Dusty Mabe]

dustymabe commented on the pull-request: `Don't build Atomic Host in F30 and onward in
the favor of FCOS` that you are following:
``
@adamwill - we're trying to do this now before branching so that we don't have to
do it twice. We do know we won't have an F30 Atomic. We will have a Fedora CoreOS but
it won't be exactly on Fedora 30 release day. Our plan there is to keep doing two week
releases of Fedora 29 Atomic Host until the EOL of Fedora 29. This will allow us to keep
Atomic Host going without investing cycles into it for Fedora 30. The investment in the 30
timeframe will be for Fedora CoreOS. 

More context here: https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/145
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/pungi-fedora/pull-request/686

[Adam Williamson]

adamwill commented on the pull-request: `Don't build Atomic Host in F30 and onward in
the favor of FCOS` that you are following:
``
OK, then that's fine.
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/pungi-fedora/pull-request/686

[Mohan Boddu]

mohanboddu merged a pull-request against the project: `pungi-fedora` that you are
following.

Merged pull-request:

``
Don't build Atomic Host in F30 and onward in the favor of FCOS
``

https://pagure.io/pungi-fedora/pull-request/686