On 02/17/2017 02:42 AM, Thomas Mueller wrote:
Am 16.02.2017 um 14:51 schrieb Josh Boyer:
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 10:45 AM, Dusty Mabe <dusty(a)dustymabe.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 02/08/2017 08:01 PM, Dusty Mabe wrote:
>>> After some discussions with mattdm and sgallagh about the cloud base
>>> image and the server WG we have decided for now to leave the cloud
>>> base image out of the server WG. Obviously it doesn't make sense to
>>> have it stay as owned by the Atomic WG so here is what I would like to
>>> propose:
>>>
>>> - Have the cloud base image owned by a CLOUD SIG
>>> - Mainly members of the old CLOUD WG that care about the cloud
>>> base image, including me.
>>> - Create a new pagure issue tracker for the cloud sig.
>> I received quite a few +1s for this so I went ahead and created the
>> issue tracker in Pagure:
>>
>>
https://pagure.io/cloud-sig
> There are a lot of changes going on around atomic, cloud, the WG, the
> SIG, etc. Could I trouble someone to write up a blog post or mailing
> list thread on devel (or both!) that covers what the current plan is
> and the direction going forward? For those that aren't working in
> this space day to day, it would be very helpful. Particularly for
> groups that have to interact with both cloud and atomic from time to
> time, like rel-eng and FESCo.
also for outsiders. I originally subscribed to this cloud@ mailinglist
because of interest in cloud-base vagrant images and now realized this
cloud is more atomic.
Hey Thomas,
Yes, that is part of the original email in this thread. I'm still on
the fence on whether or not we should break out into a new mailing
list for fedora-atomic from this list. Would you say that the atomic
mails make you less interested in following this list?
Also, would you be interested in being a part of the cloud SIG focused
on the cloud base image?
Dusty