for discussion: Fedora OpenShift as an objective

[Stephen Gallagher]

On Tue, 2015-09-29 at 16:56 -0400, Josh Boyer 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?
> 


I'm having a conversation about Fedora Server and OpenShift with Joe
Brockmeier later this morning. I'll include this as a topic of
conversation and see where it leads.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/council-discuss/attachments/20150930/97d751cb/attachment.sig>