Thoughts on Fedora Server lifecycle

[Stephen Gallagher]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 11/05/2013 07:38 AM, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-11-05 at 11:43 +0000, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>> 
>> On 11/05/2013 11:35 AM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> If the cloud WG limits itself to the guest end of things
>>> shouldn't it really be called "cloud guest WG"? cloud WG sounds
>>> like it deals with *everything* concerning cloud deployments.
>> 
>> The hosting and running the cloud itself is an server role if not
>> we wind up having to split the server WG into thousand parts...
>> 
> I do not totally agree with this view. A cloud host is a very
> specialized minimal install that normally just needs the hypervisor
> and an agent to run VMs, and pretty much nothing else. I do not see
> it as a general use case for the Server WG that should rather deal
> with fully functional machines.
> 

There's certainly a discussion to be had around where things like
oVirt nodes would belong. I'm CCing Matthew Miller to get his
attention here so we can start talking about this between the two
groups (I'm not sure if he is constantly reading our mailing list).
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.15 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlJ457oACgkQeiVVYja6o6N98ACeJdNT+tL1EI6WYhAcd4YDx1pW
i1EAoJxaBEmWDeJ/yf8TLzMsHrqzjdKr
=IfAU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----