Deliverables and release engineering changes for Fedora.Next

[Zachary Oglesby]

On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 9:59 AM, Pete Travis <lists at petetravis.com> wrote:

>
> On Apr 24, 2014 11:08 AM, "Stephen Gallagher" <sgallagh at redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > On 04/23/2014 09:35 AM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> > > Hi! As it seems, Fedora.Next and product planning leads also to
> > > changes how Fedora is produced and how it's going to be distributed
> > > to our users.
> > >
> > > For this, we need to collect product deliverables, so needed
> > > changes for release engineering can be planned (and implemented)
> > > and as I was talking to Dennis, we're are currently blocked on it.
> > >
> > >
> > > I created rel-eng ticket - WGs, please, try to sum up required
> > > changes there (in consumable way), so we have it in one place (for
> > > possible overlaps in requirements etc).
> > >
> > > https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5891
> > >
> >
> >
> > Before we submit this to the rel-eng ticket, we should come to a
> > consensus on exactly what we plan to ship in F21.
> >
> > - From the Technical Specification[1]:
> >
> >
> > Fedora Server will run on and provide install media for i686, x86_64,
> > and armv7hl servers.
> >
> > There will be two official install media for the Fedora Server:
> >
> > * A network installation media (either a traditional netinst.iso or a
> > boot.fedoraproject.org style)
> > * A local installation media providing the default package set as well
> > as any featured roles that are meaningfully installed without a
> > network connection.
> >   * The local installation media will be allowed a maximum size to fit
> > on a 4.0GB USB device.
> >   * The local installation media can be pointed at network resources
> > to make available a larger package set.
> >
> >
> > We previously deferred the plans on what type of network-install media
> > we would support. I think it's probably time to bring that back up
> > now. The local installation media should be pretty straightforward.
> >
> > - From previous discussions with Dennis Gilmore (CCed) it sounds to me
> > that our ISO-creation tools will build a network-install tree as a
> > side-effect, so if I understand correctly, we should be able to use
> > the classic netinst.iso or virt-install simply pointed at the Fedora
> > Server install tree as well. If this is the case, I'd suggest that we
> > should probably ship a netinst.iso that points at the Fedora Server tree.
> >
> >
> > > Currently, Alpha Change Deadline is planned for no earlier than
> > > 2014-07-22, it's not as far as it sounds, especially if changes in
> > > releng are needed. So let's try to work this out as soon as
> > > possible.
> > >
> > > I suppose, in the end, FESCo should approve requested changes in
> > > product deliverables. So once requirements are collected, I'll
> > > create (yet another) ticket for FESCo. Or even better - as Cloud
> > > did - Change proposal would be the best solution, even after the
> > > submission deadline.
> > >
> >
> > [1]
> >
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Server/Technical_Specification#Supported_Architectures_and_Install_Media
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > Version: GnuPG v1
> > Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
> >
> > iEYEARECAAYFAlNZRWIACgkQeiVVYja6o6P2awCfaz+5bsAhPqNWb0he1nDHdyFp
> > SJAAnRIXy1A+V+Cy86gwWt1owlyRpEzh
> > =jeEF
> > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> >
>
> I'd also like to see publicized kickstart (templates?) that will produce a
> given role with minimal site customization.  We can cover the tweaking
> required in the book Zach has been considering.
>
> --Pete
>
Indeed, that would be helpful. I have not started working on the meat of
the documentation yet, but kickstarts would allow me to get started early.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/server/attachments/20140425/79231bf1/attachment.html>