fedora-release-$PRODUCT, /etc/issue, /etc/os-release, Per-Product Configs and more!

Josh Boyer jwboyer at fedoraproject.org
Mon Jul 7 15:17:26 UTC 2014

On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 9:02 AM, Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh at redhat.com> wrote:
> Hash: SHA1
> On 07/06/2014 03:43 AM, William wrote:
>> On Thu, 2014-07-03 at 10:05 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 9:57 AM, Stephen Gallagher
>>> <sgallagh at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
>>>> On 07/03/2014 01:42 AM, William wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 2014-07-02 at 20:40 -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote:
>>>>>> On 07/02/2014 06:55 PM, William wrote:
>>>>>>>> First of all, I'd like to formally propose that each of
>>>>>>>> the products will have a fedora-release-$PRODUCT (and
>>>>>>>> corresponding generic-release-$PRODUCT) package. This
>>>>>>>> package will meet several needs (with magical
>>>>>>>> hand-waving in this initial email).
>>>>>>> How will this work with fedup from 20 to 21? Will there
>>>>>>> be multiple upgrade targets?
>>>>>> Why would that be necessary?  All packages are in one
>>>>>> repository, so fedora-release-$PRODUCT will be upgraded to
>>>>>> the next version and everything will be fine.
>>>>> My machine doesn't currently have a fedora-release-$PRODUCT
>>>>> package installed. So how will fedup work out what one to put
>>>>> on my system? Will these packages be added to 20, and the
>>>>> user need to preinstall before fedup?
>>>> It won't put one on your system. Upgrades from a
>>>> non-Productized Fedora will remain non-Productized. It's not
>>>> *less* Fedora than before.
>>>> The Products are basically a statement that "this minimal set
>>>> of packages and services are available on the system". A
>>>> non-productized Fedora install is essentially just a
>>>> continuation of the classic do-it-yourself approach that Fedora
>>>> has been up to this point.
>>> That's misleading.  Fedora hasn't been releasing
>>> "do-it-yourself" releases.  Our previous install images were
>>> composed and tested by QA, including testing fedup upgrades from
>>> the previous release.  With Fedora.next, we don't have an install
>>> image that is an equivalent of <= F20.
>>> Perhaps I have missed them, but I've seen no discussion or plans
>>> around testing upgrades to F21 from F20.  Unless the Products
>>> intend to test upgrading from F20, and/or QA intends to somehow
>>> test fedup from F20 to F21 in a non-product manner, we're
>>> essentially changing the semantics of upgrades.  I agree it
>>> should still work, but saying it's a continuation of existing
>>> practice when it isn't is wrong.
>>> josh
>> It's also misleading given how much focus has been given to the
>> three new products that will be released: So why now is there a
>> "non-productised" version? That's not been advertised much.
> I honestly don't know how much more we could have advertised that.
> We've been talking about it since the beginning. Particularly about
> how the Fedora Products are additive to the classic Fedora and that
> spins aren't going away (they're non-productized versions too).

You're talking about additive in the "they all use the same repos"
sense, but there is no planned install media that will be produced
similar to the F20 release.  There are the 3 products, and there are
the spins.  The product closest to the existing Fedora default is
Workstation, and we're targeting a live media as the primary
deliverable.  There have been 0 plans or discussions around
fedup/upgrades from F20 so far.

> I've talked about this until I was blue in the face at every
> opportunity. Please do not confuse "I missed this" with "It wasn't
> advertised".

At some point, less talking and more actual planning/doing is needed.
I've seen no work put towards upgrade paths at all.

>> I think that some attention needs to be paid to the F20 -> F21
>> upgrade path, and it shouldn't be left to the last minute. Do you
>> need to choose a product via fedup at upgrade time? Do you support
>> a non-productised version?
> Of course attention is going to be paid here. But it really should be

"going to be" is the main problem.

> no different than existing upgrades. If you want to pick a product
> after upgrade, you just 'yum install fedora-release-$PRODUCT' and
> you'll get the new release file that includes the hard requirements to
> be that Product. If you don't install that release package, you'll
> essentially just remain a DIY environment.
> At least, this is the way I've been envisioning it and describing for
> a long time now. If we're going to change this plan, I feel like the
> week of Alpha Freeze is probably kind of late...

That isn't a plan.  It's a fuzzy idea of how it should work.  If
that's what we think we should do, we need to actually get people on
board with it, start working out the details, and start testing


More information about the devel mailing list