Deadlines

[Stephen Gallagher]

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

On 02/21/2014 10:57 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> 
> On 02/21/2014 03:33 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
>> On Fri, 2014-02-21 at 15:19 +0000, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
>> wrote:
>>> On 02/21/2014 03:16 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
>>>> It has a funded team to work on it and to care for Server
>>>> specific cases.
>>> Irrelevant to Fedora and perhaps RH should start re-allocating
>>> resources to networkd
>> It is very relevant to Fedora which upstream projects are funded
>> and for what work, because Fedora does not do very much Upstream
>> work, it is a downstream from this POV.
> 
> Care to clarify that statement as in how is this more relevant to
> Fedora as opposed to any other downstreams that package and ship NM
> and any other project for that matter.
> 
>> 
>> I appreciate you like systemd-networkd however *that* doesn't
>> matter. Right now NM is a better technical choice.
>> 
>>>> The systemd-networkd support, at the moment, is a limited
>>>> tool for some special cases and arguably should remain just
>>>> that.
>>>> 
>>>> So at the moment NM is the best technical choice for us too.
>>> 
>>> I thought the .next and wg effort was aiming for the "future"
>>> not basing itself on to be obsoleted technology.
>> Well before you declare NM as "obsolete" you need to prove that
>> it is.
> 
> Like is being done with openlmi and cockpit compared to everything
> that exist out there.
> 
>> 
>>> Networkd is going to be providing the network infrastructure
>>> for embedded/server
>> at the moment Networkd can be classified as "immature", so it can
>> be the basis for a Fedora Server. Once that situation will change
>> we can certainly revisit this.
> 
> And openlmi and cockpit are considered being mature?
> 

Different layering levels. Cockpit and OpenLMI are technologies that
provide a useful high-level view into the system. If they have bugs or
are broken, there are plenty of low-level fallbacks (such as SSH and
config file mangling) that can take their place. The networking stack
is fundamental plumbing and should therefore be treated with more care.

I'm not against investigating networkd as a future solution for Fedora
Server. I think it has a lot of potential. Unfortunately, right now
it's "immature" in the sense that it doesn't even build in Fedora
because it lacks support on some architectures[1]. That's a
non-starter in my opinion.

[1]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2014-February/017146.html
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlMHewAACgkQeiVVYja6o6MlvQCfW6DzgNgQE/VW5Hmc/INCFzbO
q8gAnA6rl7WNVqthEDf7bgniOtr/iZY7
=xqIy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----