Starting the Talking Points for F22

[M. Edward (Ed) Borasky]

On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 5:07 PM, Matthew Miller
<mattdm at fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 03:26:36PM -0700, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
>> 1. *Fedora* Atomic host and its release media / disk images / Vagrant boxes
>
> Right.
>
>> 2. Fedora 22 Docker image (which right now is a tarball and not
>> available on Docker Hub)
>
> There *is* an official docker image on the hub, at
> <https://registry.hub.docker.com/_/fedora/>. F22 will go there when
> it is released. As I understand it, they didn't want it filled up with
> alha and beta images.

That seems like a missing step in the test / QA process - one which
I've been force to script in my own testing process for releasing on
F22. Weren't the F21 Docker images posted to Docker Hub for anyone to
test at some point before final release? Admittedly I haven't looked
at the formal test pages on the wiki so I don't know if it's there or
not. Also, the test compose / release candidate cycle doesn't always
deliver a Docker image tarball - RC1 had one but RC2 doesn't.

>
>> 3. fedora-dockerfiles package
>
> Plus, layered images built from these on top of the base image. Those
> are available in the Docker Hub too (https://hub.docker.com/u/fedora/),
> and possibly on a Fedora-run registry at some point.

That would be nice - I'd like to refactor my monolithic nearly 4 GB
image into something a lot saner that I didn't have to maintain.
Everything's Fedora except RStudio and a bunch of R packages.

>> I think the "pivot" moving Atomic out of the Fedora process is a
>> problem for developers, but given how fast Docker and Kubernetes are
>> moving it's unavoidable. My Atomic use case will be well-served by the
>> upcoming CentOS effort to make a CentOS Atomic that tracks RHEL
>> Atomic.
>
> As with CentOS itself, the development path will be from this
> updated-every-two-weeks Fedora Atomic to its slower-moving downstreams,
> but as I understand the plan, on a _much_ faster timeframe. So, it's
> great to be involved at both levels.

My Atomic use case is quite narrow and outside what I think is the
"mainstream" Atomic use case. I'm using it as a Docker host running
under Windows 8.1 and Windows 10 Client Hyper-V in place of
Boot2Docker or Docker Machine. Almost any Atomic build will do that
now but I'm looking for something that is slower-moving than a full
release every two weeks. A full release every Fedora release is ideal
but since that's been ruled out, the next best thing is a CentOS
Atomic that tracks RHEL Atomic.