At the request of Chris Murphy, the following change to the agenda:
== Agenda ==
1. Explore opportunities for cooperation with Cloud WG / SIG
Facilitated and improved support for using Base Cloud Images
2. Deploying services via RPM and Ansible (continuation)
3. Fedora Server Documentation review
We discussed opportunities of a cooperation with Dusty Mabe in early March. One result was
that Dusty is not back from leave until April. Only then can we continue. Dusty raised the
issue at one of the first cloud meetings March 30. Now it's the end of May, without
any progress. We as Server WG have clearly expressed our interest several times, last time
in a meeting end of March.
Proposal: Defer this topic (low in priority) and wait to see what Cloud WG comes up with.
Regarding a VM version of Fedora Server, we might have to seek an interim solution.
I already added / refined use case „Wildfly“ as described by jwhimpel (via email)
and will hopefully manage to complete the other use cases of his email until tomorrow.
We had a short discussion at java-devel about it:
We need a plan about our further proceedings.
We have now sufficient content to start and make the content publicly available (Marked as
beta for now). Most of the articles are written by me. We need to review each of them.
Maybe we can split them up and each o us take on the review of an article. Some items are
I will add a list of articles needing a review at
tomorrow before our meeting.
Apart from the agenda, I would like to prevent the creation of legends.
Am 01.06.2021 um 22:34 schrieb Chris Murphy
Two meetings ago  Server WG discussed default
filesystem/partitioning briefly with the idea of consider Btrfs at
some point, but not for Fedora 35.
It starts 17:34:52 with
"I wonder if the partitioning changes are no longer relevant now that we use btrfs by
"but yeah the old 50GB for / was a pain“
me: "Server does not use btrfs"
nirik: "server defaults to XFS and LVM“
So the discussion starts with an erroneous recollection by Michel, what has been cleared
Other contributions express contentment with the current XFS/LVM combination.
Resume dcavalca 17:40:49:
"once btrfs gets better support for raid5/6 and maybe encryption, then I think
it's worth a rediscussion“
17:50:06 Eighth_Doctor: "nirik, pboyHB: there are a few things on the list before
attempting to switch Server to Btrfs by default“
Maybe, my englisch language skills are limited, but to take that as "with the idea of
consider Btrfs at some point, but not for Fedora 35.“ seems a bit strange.
...raised by Peter Boy in that proposal's devel@ thread that the
itself is out of order.  Since it is a Server working group member
concerned about the proper order of things, I think that needs to be
settled by Server working group folks.
I’ve some difficulties to translate „out of order“ in this context. My position was (and
is) if Cloud WG would be honestly interested in cooperation with server and exploration of
alignment of server and cloud, such a major decision, which increases the differences,
would not be made in advance before any consultation (which we started to talk about 3