Cloud infrastructure package group

Peter Robinson pbrobinson at gmail.com
Tue Aug 23 21:25:58 UTC 2011


On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 10:09 PM, Stephen John Smoogen <smooge at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 12:52, David Nalley <david at gnsa.us> wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 2:00 PM, Bill Nottingham <notting at redhat.com> wrote:
>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731712
>>>
>>> The HekaFS maintainers were looking for a appropriate group for their
>>> package. I was thinking that perhaps having a 'cloud infrastructure'
>>> or 'cloud support' group might be the best place, but we don't have
>>> one of those, and I'm not sure what all packages should be in it.
>>>
>>> Would someone fom the Cloud SIG like to take a stab at it?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Bill
>>>
>>
>>
>> While I am happy to do this, haven't we already hit string freeze for
>> F16 (August 2nd per the schedule)? So we are talking about
>> comps-f17.xml.in?
>>
>> If I were to do so I think I'd put the following in the group:
>>
>> eucatools
>> aeolus
>> deltacloud
>> sheepdog
>> ceph
>> glusterfs
>> hekafs
>> boxgrinder
>
> I am guessing that there will also be a need to have what is optional
> and required...

I would possibly suggest that they're all optional, there's lots of
different cloud technologies there a lot of which are completely
standalone separate products that aren't required to interoperate. By
having them all optional there's a menu with the list there and people
can select the particular type of cloud technologies they wish to use.

Peter



More information about the cloud mailing list