RFC: Proposal for Rel-Eng project management/planning

[Ralph Bean]

On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 12:48:24PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 12:40 PM, Ralph Bean <rbean at redhat.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 10:58:34AM -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote:
> >> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 10:25:36AM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> >> > On Fri, 24 Apr 2015 09:36:46 -0500
> >> > Adam Miller <maxamillion at fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> >> > > My hope here is to introduce a new piece of infrastructure to fill
> >> > > this requirement that provides a kanban-style board of cards much like
> >> > > Trello[2] but using a FOSS solution that we can host ourselves. For
> >> > > this I'd like to propose the use of Cantas[3]. (This part would likely
> >> > > need a request sent to Fedora Infrastructure team unless we're fine
> >> > > just hosting it somewhere like OpenShift Online).
> >> > >
> >> > > Questions, comments and general snide remarks welcome! :)
> >> >
> >> > As mentioned in a followup, it would need to get packaged up, etc if we
> >> > want to host one.
> >>
> >> I suggested to David Gay (oddshocks) that he look at this for
> >> packaging.
> >
> > It looks like there are nodejs issues in the rawhide buildroot that
> > will block packaging efforts here for the time being:
> > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/nodejs/2015-April/000176.html
> 
> So, in one of my many discussions with Paul last week, we were talking
> about containers, how we're approaching them in Fedora, etc.  One of
> the ideas was that we should probably look at dogfooding container
> technology within Fedora itself to become more comfortable with it.

+1 to the spirit.  Talking more fully about the details of what this
would mean at flock would be a good target.  If some of the Fedora
Engineering team members could get some more experience with the
pieces before then so we can have a more fully-informed discussion,
that would be best (I'm just operating on hearsay at this point).

> I know we like things to be packaged in Fedora and there is nothing
> wrong with that.  However, deploying Cantas via a container would seem
> to be an ideal thing to try as an initial dogfooding effort.  It would
> let both rel-eng and Infra get used to the technologies while also
> providing a valuable service to themselves.  What do people think of
> that idea?

Pierre and I started this same discussion on the side at PyCon.  Our
policy has been that all of our apps have to be packaged as rpms for
Fedora and therefore must meet all the packaging guidelines.  This
historically made a lot of sense even when it was an inconvenience:
Fedora Infrastructure should dogfood Fedora Development. When we
started getting into unbundling css/js assets the past few years, this
quickly became intractable.  I've been trying to package up bootstrap
css for about a year now and there's no end in sight.

... but there are a hundred and one more angles to consider about how
we deploy our apps in Infrastructure.NEXT.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 473 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/rel-eng/attachments/20150427/90dd9f20/attachment.sig>