for discussion: Fedora OpenShift as an objective

[Adam Miller]

On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 3:56 PM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer at fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 4:52 PM, Matthew Miller
> <mattdm at fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>
> <snip good info>
>
>> I think this is something on the order of an Objective rather than just
>> a change/feature proposal because it's actually a rather tall order. On
>> the technical side, currently OpenShift can't be easily packaged
>> because it includes some 200+ Go libraries, and we don't even have
>> approved Go packaging guidelines. This probably means we'd be asking
>> for a very large bundling exception (note 'Active upstream Security
>> Team' as part of the justification). On the less technical but still
>> important side, I'd like to see related marketing and documentation,
>> and coordination with Fedora Atomic and the Fedora Cloud WG, and
>> possibly with Fedora Server as well (I know OpenShift node as server
>> role is already under some consideration).
>>
>> Thoughts, comments, thrown vegetables?
>
> Do you have someone in mind to lead this objective?  If so, is there a
> reason they didn't propose this themselves?

Having come to the Fedora Engineering team from the OpenShift team I
think I'd be a good candidate and we're already going to be running
OpenShift in Fedora Release Engineering for the OSBS(OpenShift Build
Service) portion of the Layered Image Build Service[0]. However, I
should note that the OpenShift installation there will not be user
accessible, it's just going to effectively be a build target for Koji
so if we have plans/hopes/dreams of running our own OpenShift for
Fedora users, that's a whole different ball of wax.

I didn't really think we needed a mass proposal or anything so I
didn't write one (though I think my plans/goals were a minor subset of
what Matt is proposing), I've already been working with upstream a
little bit on this and as of a few weeks back I've become involved
with making sure the upstream release packages are in a good state
(previous release had some issues so I volunteered to help).

It's all in my COPR space[0] which is where it started long ago when I
was on the OpenShift team, but the plan was to ultimately end up in
the Fedora Proper repositories, was just a matter of finding time and
there's still no official packaging guidelines for golang. As an
aside, a number of folks in the upstream group has permissions on my
COPR for builds and it's largely been a shared effort so far.

-AdamM

[0] - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Layered_Docker_Image_Build_Service
[1] - https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/maxamillion/origin-next/

>
> josh
> _______________________________________________
> council-discuss mailing list
> council-discuss at lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/council-discuss
>
> The Fedora Project's mission is to lead the advancement of free and
> open source software and content as a collaborative community.