server January 2015

server@lists.fedoraproject.org

10 participants
14 discussions

Draft separation of Server Role requirements from criteria
by Adam Williamson 07 Feb '15

07 Feb '15

Hi, folks! For F21 we stuffed the functional requirements for the sole Role (domain controller) into the release criteria. But we all agreed this was kinda sucky and wouldn't scale, and they should be split out somehow. Here's my proposal for 'somehow'. At first I was thinking of a sort of general 'role definition' wiki page, but when I sat down to draft one I couldn't really think of much that would go on one *besides* the functional requirements, so I figured I'd keep it simple and just draft a template for requirements. So, my draft consists of a template: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Adamwill/Draft_role_requirements_templa… an example implementation: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Adamwill/Draft_domain_controller_role_r… a category page: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Server_role_requirements which also acts as a short overall explanation of the 'requirements' system, and a proposal for the release criteria. We'd drop all the domain controller stuff, and add the following criteria: Alpha ----- * The [[:Category:Server_role_requirements|core requirements]] for all Featured Server Roles must be met, but it is acceptable if moderate workarounds are necessary to achieve this footnote #1: Featured roles - [[FIXME|this page]] contains the list of Featured server roles footnote #2: Moderate workarounds? - For instance, if a service needs to be manually enabled or a configuration file minimally tweaked, this is acceptable. Beta ---- * The [[:Category:Server_role_requirements|core requirements]] for all Featured Server Roles must be met, without any workarounds being necessary * The [[:Category:Server_role_requirements|other requirements]] for all Featured Server Roles must be met, but it is acceptable if moderate workarounds are necessary to achieve this footnote #1: Workarounds - This means the role must meet its core requirements, i.e. be broadly usable for its intended purpose, after correct deployment and configuration via the role mechanism, but moderate workarounds as described in the [[BLAH|Alpha criterion]] are acceptable if necessary to fulfill the full set of requirements. Final ----- * All [[:Category:Server_role_requirements|requirements]] for all Featured Server Roles must be met, without any workarounds being necessary The FIXME indicates we also need some kind of place where we define which server roles are 'Featured', which AFAIK we don't at present. In case anyone's wondering why I didn't simply have Alpha, Beta and Final requirements for each role, I considered that, but it seemed a bit too tightly couple to a particular release process, when we've discussed changing the Server release process in future. I quite like the way this proposal puts the things together; all the concepts make sense separately, for me. It makes sense just thinking about a Server product, whatever its release process, that Roles would have the two levels of requirements specified in the proposal ("Core" and regular). And then as a separate matter it makes sense (to me) to enforce them at the Alpha, Beta and Final points of our *current* release process in the way proposed above. What do folks think of this general proposal? Thanks! We can also discuss it at the meeting next week if folks want to. Note, the actual requirements listed on the domain controller page are copy/pasted straight out of the F21 criteria; we can certainly tweak and extend those, but please if you want to discuss that make it a separate thread, the intent here is for us to discuss this *framework* for role requirements and hooking them into the release criteria. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net

2 2

Server SIG Weekly Meeting Minutes (2014-01-27)
by Stephen Gallagher 28 Jan '15

28 Jan '15

========================================================= #fedora-meeting-1: Server SIG Weekly Meeting (2014-01-27) ========================================================= Meeting started by sgallagh at 16:01:45 UTC. The full logs are available at http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2015-01-27/fedora-meeting… . Meeting summary --------------- * roll call (sgallagh, 16:01:51) * Fedora 22 progress (sgallagh, 16:09:41) * The anaconda team has added new hooks in Fedora 22, so we can simplify the branding needs as well as altering the defaults for things like partitioning. This is going to make it easier to generate the product-specific install media. (sgallagh, 16:11:33) * I've got a proof-of-concept of the Database Server Role in progress on my github clone of the rolekit repo. It's about 50% complete at this point. (sgallagh, 16:14:44) * I've worked with the Cockpit upstream designer and we have a visual design ready for the Domain Controller support. However, I have nonexistent JavaScript skills and am looking for a volunteer to help with implementation. (sgallagh, 16:16:45) * Anyone with some JavaScript skills and an interest in Fedora Server is invited to help with adding the Domain Controller Role to Cockpit. (sgallagh, 16:19:57) * Open Floor (sgallagh, 16:26:52) * ACTION: Corey84 volunteers for testing Server features. (sgallagh, 16:31:12) Meeting ended at 16:35:14 UTC. Action Items ------------ * Corey84 volunteers for testing Server features. Action Items, by person ----------------------- * Corey84 * Corey84 volunteers for testing Server features. * **UNASSIGNED** * (none) People Present (lines said) --------------------------- * sgallagh (38) * Corey84 (13) * danofsatx (8) * simo (6) * zodbot (5) * nirik (3) * corey84-- (3) * jsmith (2) * adamw (0) * mitr (0) * stefw (0) * tuanta (0) * mizmo (0) Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4 .. _`MeetBot`: http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot

3 3

Server support of ARM
by Dennis Gilmore 27 Jan '15

27 Jan '15

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi all, While anaconda works very well on ARM to install Fedora and should be the recommended way to install Fedora, particularly for Server. Many people are used to using disk images and some hardware (most relevant is teh beaglebone black[1]) are not capable of really running the anaconda due to limited memory. I would like to propose that the Server WG adds a ARM disk image that would be a pre-canned Server install that can be put onto a sdcard or put internally onto a system to allow someone to run Fedora Server. There is a Minimal disk image today that will still exist and would serve a different purpose. The way the images work is that on first boot you get initial-setup run to set language, timezone, set root password and optionally create a user. I have installed cockpit on an arm box and hit one bug[2] possibly the docker support should be disabled as docker is only supported on x86_64 the same would be true of 32 bit x86 installs as well as other arches. otherwise things seemed to work okay. I feel there is value for users, especially home users in running Fedora Server even on low end hardware, a beaglebone black for instance would make a great dns, dhcp, server. I would like to run freeipa on a arm box. hardware like the cubietruck[3] are good potential candidates for running Fedora Server on also. they are a couple of readily available options. less readily available is server hardware like we use as the builders in Fedora. Which are all running Fedora 21. In order to make a Fedora Server ARM disk image we would need a kickstart. I am happy to get it started and in spin-kickstarts but would appreciate someone from teh WG taking ownership of it. one thing that me need some thought and discussion would be the disk partitioning of the image. Regards Dennis [1] http://beagleboard.org/black [2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1186019 [3] http://docs.cubieboard.org/products/start#a20-cubietruck -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJUx+bEAAoJEH7ltONmPFDRbasP/3zZLQREqBXqN0NkC++IPyrj QSOt7eQ3rJYCTkCQVUnVrZEboCQkpMGcc8iJBoTnw/148JJknY5187tbWB+ayxGQ Y5v4ksp82UZsOuE6fWi5jR257ko9uQKiwgLNPcUy/wE1ZNgHCqBrNWwIcBNSzmtd wHOkEh+MFurGbwHoLY6VH5F6yP6+y2VuX/eV0NNLhTjUvXFEoaRmKBIQLHMts3l3 Gxzbzt89k2+IKXQvbmPtwMbpCsEuow1AuwgN8PNYZ+yvQFOQjYGkuGGIRA3sxD46 8lcxLqkw9IuNtH9c779PdBH5i74LS74nm5B8T9rt7Q538fhCj5OTrS+2X5ANmNlA h8g6cqH3/3ubxM+0vGsieG0Ol7p6aZhlzpR5Ul8NFm1Uegc89yMCmoIbhoCJEcnb jAAJ7fwh04c0ae9vm1wpGl26M/G4hmDW0Iw5/jrHklUlWGNCIYcva0y6jyUJWxFb SuRI+RP57Kzxfi91TwMQoMfRcx1b9DmvFbgwYSRdNTCkYw2uXlBL8tmbMLH79mx5 X6R0qBOQaT45FjG5RIDPfDumJ5pl8oobzVwEfI8+Ych4fnr+8ClKu4uz98yXPoGV kbM2+wT5k0GFMzLejI+WO3DnCKNP7Ekfkq+QZUGzOU6YIjZrCtiknZzSJisdfKmw P97qzAZTG12F14pDlCKF =rj60 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

2015-01-26 @ 1700 UTC ** F22 Blocker Review Meeting
by Mike Ruckman 26 Jan '15

26 Jan '15

# F22 Blocker Review meeting # Date: 2015-01-26 # Time: 1700 UTC # Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.freenode.net I seem to have forgotten how to use the "send" button on my mail client, so this annoucnement is getting out a bit late. Apologies for that! We've got another blocker review in a couple hours! We currently have several proposed blockers: 2 Alpha, 1 Beta and 2 Final. So if you're around after the QA meeting, come and join us for some blocker review goodness :) If you want to take a look at the proposed or accepted blockers, the full list can be found here: https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/ Make sure to click through the milestones to see how many we have before the meeting! We'll be evaluating these bugs to see if they violate any of the Release Criteria and warrant the blocking of a release if they're not fixed. Information on the release criteria for F22 can be found on the wiki [0]. For more information about the Blocker and Freeze exception process, check out these links: - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_blocker_bug_process - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_freeze_exception_bug_process And for those of you who are curious how a Blocker Review Meeting works - or how it's supposed to go and you want to run one - check out the SOP on the wiki: - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting See you soon! [0] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Release_Criteria -- // Mike -- Fedora QA freenode: roshi http://roshi.fedorapeople.org

1 0

Anyone running Ceph?
by Patrick McGarry 24 Jan '15

24 Jan '15

Hey all, As the Ceph team dives deeper and deeper into the multi-headed distro world I'm looking to gather anecdotal evidence of what the Ceph user experience is like on various distros. If anyone here is running (or has run) Ceph on some flavor of Fedora, I'd love to hear about it. My hope is that we can work with the Fedora community to polish off any difficulties or awkwardness that may still exist. Thanks! Best Regards, Patrick McGarry Director Ceph Community || Red Hat http://ceph.com || http://community.redhat.com @scuttlemonkey || @ceph

2 3

Plan of Record for Fedora 22 Network Install Media
by Stephen Gallagher 23 Jan '15

23 Jan '15

(Cross-posted to the WG mailing lists; please reply only to devel@) == Overview == Today in #anaconda, we had a discussion of the plans for network install media for Fedora 22. We acknowledged that the network install (and more generally, unattended installation) story in Fedora 21 was somewhat lacking. In particular, there was user confusion around how to deploy Fedora Workstation in an unattended manner. Some of the problems we faced in Fedora 21 were a result of not having necessary plumbing in Anaconda (largely because we didn't even realize this until well into Beta phase, at which point we just started breaking out the duct tape and chewing gum). In particular, we needed a way for individual Fedora editions to provide a mechanism for specifying different defaults (such as automatic partitioning rules or the default environment group that would be displayed in an attended install). Without these things, while we could produce media with separate graphical branding, we couldn't truly produce separate network installs for Cloud, Server and Workstation. So we settled on producing only the Server network install media. == Output == In Fedora 22, we will be producing four network install ISOs: * Fedora Server - Server branding - Default environment group: Fedora Server - Auto-partitioning defaults: LVM on XFS (except /boot) - Responsible WG: Server WG * Fedora Workstation - Workstation branding - Default environment group: Fedora Workstation - Auto-partitioning defaults: LVM on EXT4 - Responsible WG: Workstation WG * Fedora Cloud - Cloud branding - Default environment group: Fedora Cloud - Auto-partitioning defaults: TBD - Responsible WG: Cloud WG * Fedora "Generic" (name TBD) - Generic Fedora branding - Default environment group: minimal - Auto-partitioning defaults: TBD - Responsible WG: Base WG In addition, there is ongoing discussion around media for bare-metal Fedora Atomic installations. This has not been finalized, but will likely result in an additional output. While each of these network installs will be *capable* of also installing any of the other products (though possibly not with the expected auto-paritioning), we have agreed that QA testing will only be performed on the intended environment group target for the branded media. We will not advertise or make any special effort to support other targets. == Remaining work that needs to be done == Release engineering will need to modify their compose tools to produce each of these install trees, as well as handling the necessary mirroring functions. The working groups responsible for each of these install media will be responsible for performing the following tasks before the Alpha Freeze (ideally well before, so we can run test composes and fix issues without slipping): * Modify the appropriate fedora-productimg-$PRODUCT package to include an anaconda extension model that will extend the InstallClass and set the default environment group and optionally modify the auto-partitioning functionality. * Review the contents of comps-f22.xml.in and the related kickstart files in spin-kickstarts to ensure that the install media contains the appropriate content. For simplicity in understanding who to contact, it would be beneficial if each of the responsible working groups would nominate an individual to be the point of contact on these changes. I volunteer myself to represent the Server WG in this capacity. Given that we branch on February 10th enter Alpha Freeze on February 24th, I'd like to propose a soft deadline (a check-in) on February 9th with a hard deadline on February 16th in order to have time to run at least one test compose prior to Alpha Freeze. == Acknowledgements == The cast of characters involved in this discussion were: * Stephen Gallagher (Server WG) * Dennis Gilmore (Release Engineering) * Brian C. Lane (Anaconda) * Ian McLeod (Project Atomic) * David Shea (Anaconda) * Adam Williamson (QA)

1 0

Call for agenda for Server SIG Meeting (2015-01-27)
by Stephen Gallagher 23 Jan '15

23 Jan '15

I have one item for the agenda already, so I figured I'd send out the call today. Dennis Gilmore would like to discuss plans for creating an ARM install DVD ISO for Fedora Server.

1 0

Agenda for Server SIG weekly meeting (2015-01-20)
by Stephen Gallagher 20 Jan '15

20 Jan '15

I don't have anything for the agenda this week and I unfortunately have a conflict that came up this morning. If the rest of you want to hold the meeting, go right ahead. I'll leave my status here: I submitted two Change pages related to Fedora Server: * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/CockpitDomainController I'll be working with the Cockpit team to get a graphical setup for the Domain Controller Role landed in F22. * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DatabaseServerRole I've made a good bit of progress on this in the last week. If anyone is interested in reviewing my work-in-progress or helping, I have pushed my current work to https://github.com/sgallagher/rolekit/tree/database (the 'database' branch, if you clone the repository) I'll be submitting some of the groundwork patches today to http://reviewboard-fedoraserver.rhcloud.com for review, so feel free to create an account there and help with that.

2 1

Server SIG Weekly Meeting Minutes (2015-01-13)
by Stephen Gallagher 13 Jan '15

13 Jan '15

========================================================= #fedora-meeting-1: Server SIG Weekly Meeting (2015-01-13) ========================================================= Meeting started by nirik at 16:00:23 UTC. The full logs are available at http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2015-01-13/fedora-meeting… . Meeting summary --------------- * roll call (nirik, 16:00:24) * Agenda (nirik, 16:03:36) * Discuss pending F22 changes related to server (nirik, 16:05:41) * Discuss pending F22 changes related to server (nirik, 16:07:57) * AGREED: The server SIG feels that the ssh config proposal provides very minimal security improvement, and is not worth any reduction in usability; accepting this change would make sense only if all relevant UIs/tools were adapted to fully support system usage after this change. [Excluding the case that "changing anything is an unfixable reduction in usability"] (+6, +1, 0) (nirik, 16:53:41) * Database role for f22 (nirik, 16:53:45) * help wanted to code-review and test database role soon. (nirik, 17:02:14) * AGREED: will not block on a management interface. Will look at working with pgadmin3 on workstation (+6,0,0) (nirik, 17:05:34) * Open Floor (nirik, 17:06:09) Meeting ended at 17:07:08 UTC. Action Items ------------ Action Items, by person ----------------------- * **UNASSIGNED** * (none) People Present (lines said) --------------------------- * simo (95) * nirik (70) * sgallagh (69) * mitr (36) * junland_2 (24) * danofsatx|w (20) * adamw (19) * zodbot (8) * tuanta_ (5) * junland (2) * stefw (0) * danofsatx (0) * tuanta (0) * mizmo (0) Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4 .. _`MeetBot`: http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot

1 0

Re: Agenda for Env-and-Stacks WG meeting (2015-01-14)
by Honza Horak 13 Jan '15

13 Jan '15

Env & Stacks WG is going to define (hopefully) some more concrete Rings plans on tomorrow's meeting. Expecting to be an interesting discussion, important enough for wider audience, let me crosspost the invitation also to other working groups. (we're aware of not very friendly time for US folks, but it doesn't seem worth changing the time-slot before the elections, since we're gonna do it after the elections anyway; feel free to use the mailing list env-and-stacks(a)fp.o instead) Honza On 01/12/2015 04:46 PM, Honza Horak wrote: > WG meeting will be at 12:00 UTC (07:00 EST, 13:00 Brno, 7:00 Boston, > 21:00 Tokyo, 22:00 Brisbane) in #fedora-meeting on Freenode. > > = Topics = > * Fedora Rings > * revisit the plan around rings > * interpret rings with users' use cases and requirements > * sync on where SCLs, copr, languages repositories etc. fit into > rings ideas > * Chairman for next meeting > * Open Floor > > _______________________________________________ > env-and-stacks mailing list > env-and-stacks(a)lists.fedoraproject.org > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/env-and-stacks

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

server January 2015