Call for agenda for Workstation WG meeting 2015-Feb-18

[Paul W. Frields]

On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 10:03:23AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 9:46 AM, Matthias Clasen <mclasen at redhat.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2015-02-17 at 11:14 -0500, Paul W. Frields wrote:
> >> Next meeting is Wednesday, 2015-Feb-18 at 1600 UTC/11:00am US-EST.
> >>
> >> Please feel free to suggest additional issues for the agenda if
> >> needed, and I'll add them.
> >>
> >> * Alpha freeze approaches! 2015-Feb-24
> >>   - By this point features should be in a testable state.
> >>   - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GNOME3.16
> >>   - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/LibinputForXorg
> >>   - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Login_Screen_Over_Wayland
> >>   -
> >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GnomeShell_NewNotifications
> >>   - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Nautilus_Improvements
> >>
> >> * Test Days -- do we want test days for any of these features, or
> >>   other release criteria?
> >>   - Current schedule (nothing for desktop yet?):
> >>     https://apps.fedoraproject.org/calendar/list/QA/?subject=Test+Day
> >>
> >> * Privacy policy
> >>   - Are we blocked at all on Spot talking with ABRT folks about data
> >>     they are storing?
> >>   - mattdm's request for uuid + Fedora version + Fedora edition/spin,
> >>     is there an appropriate place for this in our purview?
> >
> > A topic I would like to start discussing is Workstation vs Atomic. It
> > may be too early to put on the agenda yet. I haven't talked to Colin
> > about it and don't have a very concrete proposal, but I think we
> > should have it on our long-term roadmap that we'll end up with a 3
> > layer architecture of host (ideally an atomically updated image),
> > runtime and applications (see alex' work on concrete thoughts about
> > the runtime+app layers).
> 
> (I think you meant Workstation + Atomic, not vs. ;) )
> 
> I can see that being an option as well, but we really need to figure
> out the "user wants to locally modify the image" problem.  Having to
> rebuild an entire new Atomic image for Workstation just to install
> e.g. vim-enhanced system-wide seems excessive.  It would also then
> deviate from the official Workstation Atomic image.
> 
> People are used to yum/dnf install working.  I think it needs to
> continue to work in some fashion before we can really look at adopting
> Atomic.  It is an intriguing idea though, and I can see how it would
> help both QA and the "too many updates" problem.

Agreed that image + apps/package needs to work in some form.  Colin's
definitely aware of that and IIRC from Brno discussion he's thinking
about this and discussing with Alex and others.  Doesn't mean we can
really solve it in meetings, but I think we need to be tracking
progress a bit more closely somehow.

-- 
Paul W. Frields                                http://paul.frields.org/
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
  http://redhat.com/   -  -  -  -   http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
    The open source story continues to grow: http://opensource.com