Agenda for Env-and-Stacks WG meeting (2014-01-14)

Marcela Mašláňová mmaslano at
Thu Jan 16 13:15:33 UTC 2014

On 01/14/2014 05:01 PM, Jens Petersen wrote:
>     Those who can't attend the meeting should comment the draft on mailing
>     list. The deadline for document is next Monday (20th January).
> Thanks - I am afraid I won't be able to attend tonight's late meeting
> (in my timezone),
> so let me post some comments on the current draft here.
> Overall I feel the document is good and sets a good direction for the WG.
> I added a small user story for developers needs multiple development
> environments
> for different projects with different build requirements.  Probably more
> details
> and examples could be added.
> I just have some minor queries/comments about some parts/sentences:
> * QA automation
> ** Join the [[QA|Fedora QA]] and help them with the
> [[User:Tflink/taskotron_development_plan|Taskotron]] project concerning
> the future of QA automation in Fedora.
> ** Develop new tools for Fedora QA that will help achieving high
> standards of software in Fedora.
> *** An example of such a tool is
> [ rpmgrill], a set of
> analysis tests that run against a particular RPM build. Its main
> difference to [[Common_Rpmlint_issues|rpmlint]] is that rpmgrill handles
> *builds*, that is, the entire sets of RPMs built from one source RPM
> file instead of single RPM files. As soon as it is ready for deployment,
> it should be introduced to Fedora QA.
> Is this sentence needed? Does it just mean "QA can start using it as
> soon as it is ready." or something more?
> === Build systems ===
> * COPR & koji
> ** COPR able to build an SCL
> ** koji - a number of improvements for developers (buildlogs, etc.), in
> co-operation with the koji upstream.
> What about buildlogs??
> I need to look at COPR again, but I wonder if it is worth looking at the
> features of OBS and seeing if there is any low-hanging fruit that we
> could steal^Wbring to Fedora too?
> === Documentation, guidelines ===
> === DevAssistant ===
> I kind of wondered if these two are not slightly out of scope but I
> guess it is fine to include them if people in the WG are planning to
> work on them this year.
> Thanks, Jens
> _______________________________________________
> env-and-stacks mailing list
> env-and-stacks at
I guess we mainly agreed with you on the meeting.


More information about the env-and-stacks mailing list