Fedora server implementation straw man

[Shawn Starr]

On January 29, 2014 10:50:32 AM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Jan 2014 21:28:37 -0500
> 
> Shawn Starr <shawn.starr at rogers.com> wrote:
> > Hello folks,
> 
> Hey.
> 
> > I previously worked with Red Hat on their Red Hat HPC Solution (our
> > original Fork/redo of NPACI Rocks which was.. difficult). It's
> > discontinued now.
> > 
> > We had the concept of kits to do metapackages. I have the last CVS
> > snapshot code available for people to examine. I will have to mirror
> > it somewhere as my laptop as a VM/web server can only handle so much
> > bandwidth :)
> > 
> > The concept was this:
> > 
> > kit-something ---> pulls in:  kit-client-configs / kit-server-configs
> > <--- pulls in RPM dependencies for packages. Kits == Roles basically.
> > 
> > Now, we didn't have comps.xml to work with but we could maybe do
> > something like: We have a roles.xml which maps to comps.xml groups.
> > 
> > So, then "Fedora Server Role" maps to X groups in comps.xml which
> > pulls in the direct RPM dependencies.
> > 
> > The "Fedora Server Role" RPM/whatever can have then its own "turn
> > key" configuration template/setup files for the groups it pulls in to
> > configure them out-of-the-box.
> > 
> > so:
> > 
> > role-something ---> pulls in: role-client-configs /
> > role-server-configs <--- pulls in comps.xml group package RPM
> > dependencies as part of each grouping
> > 
> > That way, we dont break existing users where a Desktop also contains
> > server configurations (comps.xml -> RPM dependencies only) and we
> > gain the ability to have a higher-level grouping which adds on
> > turn-key meta configurations that are *optional*.
> > 
> > So its a one way-dependency mapping and both use cases win!
> > 
> > Thoughts?
> 
> metapackages have a number of issues... see the cons section of:
> http://yum.baseurl.org/wiki/YumGroupsOverview
> 
> In the case of just a 'fedora-server-freeipa' role, they make sense to
> me, as if someone removes a specific package that this role needs, it
> would remove the role package, which is fine, since they would no
> longer be using the role.
> 
> I'm not sure what deeper level you are suggesting here, can you provide
> a more detailed example?
> 
> kevin


Hi Kevin,

I've uploaded the original Red Hat HPC Solution source (the last snapshot of code I 
had)to Fedora People, you can browse it here:
 
http://spstarr.fedorapeople.org/ocs-rhhpc/trunk/src/

The kits concept is shown in the .spec files and how we did plugins / meta configurations.

Thanks,
Shawn
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/server/attachments/20140129/21b85f3e/attachment.html>