Hi,
in the past there was an issue with identification of deliverables which block a Fedora release. We were dealing with this issue specifically during Go/No-go meetings which is quite late for this kind of decisions. To solve this issue FESCo has started an activity [1] to identify these deliverables in advance. The list of blocking (as well as some non-blocking) deliverables for Fedora 23 is currently available on Wiki page [2].
You might want to check the list [2] to make sure we have all the blocking deliverables tracked. If you find anything what might not be correct from your point of view, please let me know, so we can discuss it. Thanks for your cooperation.
[1] https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1427 [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Program_Management/ReleaseBlocking/Fed...
Regards, Jan
On 09/02/2015 01:18 PM, Jan Kurik wrote:
Hi,
in the past there was an issue with identification of deliverables which block a Fedora release. We were dealing with this issue specifically during Go/No-go meetings which is quite late for this kind of decisions. To solve this issue FESCo has started an activity [1] to identify these deliverables in advance. The list of blocking (as well as some non-blocking) deliverables for Fedora 23 is currently available on Wiki page [2].
You might want to check the list [2] to make sure we have all the blocking deliverables tracked. If you find anything what might not be correct from your point of view, please let me know, so we can discuss it. Thanks for your cooperation.
[1] https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1427 [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Program_Management/ReleaseBlocking/Fed...
Regards, Jan
I'm curious about the pxeboot/ kernel and initramfs components and the install.img file. I make use of these via cobbler directly, but I don't see any explicit mention of them. These components are necessary to build other ones, so perhaps it's not needed to call them out?
On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 10:33 PM, Orion Poplawski orion@cora.nwra.com wrote:
On 09/02/2015 01:18 PM, Jan Kurik wrote:
Hi,
in the past there was an issue with identification of deliverables which block a Fedora release. We were dealing with this issue specifically during Go/No-go meetings which is quite late for this kind of decisions. To solve this issue FESCo has started an activity [1] to identify these deliverables in advance. The list of blocking (as well as some non-blocking) deliverables for Fedora 23 is currently available on Wiki page [2].
You might want to check the list [2] to make sure we have all the blocking deliverables tracked. If you find anything what might not be correct from your point of view, please let me know, so we can discuss it. Thanks for your cooperation.
[1] https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1427 [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Program_Management/ReleaseBlocking/Fed...
Regards, Jan
I'm curious about the pxeboot/ kernel and initramfs components and the install.img file. I make use of these via cobbler directly, but I don't see any explicit mention of them. These components are necessary to build other ones, so perhaps it's not needed to call them out?
This is a good point. I believe Base WG should be the owner of this. @Harald, @Dennis: may I ask you please to comment on this ?
Regards, Jan
-- Orion Poplawski Technical Manager 303-415-9701 x222 NWRA, Boulder/CoRA Office FAX: 303-415-9702 3380 Mitchell Lane orion@nwra.com Boulder, CO 80301 http://www.nwra.com -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
On Wed, 2015-09-02 at 21:18 +0200, Jan Kurik wrote:
Hi,
in the past there was an issue with identification of deliverables which block a Fedora release. We were dealing with this issue specifically during Go/No-go meetings which is quite late for this kind of decisions. To solve this issue FESCo has started an activity [1] to identify these deliverables in advance. The list of blocking (as well as some non-blocking) deliverables for Fedora 23 is currently available on Wiki page [2].
You might want to check the list [2] to make sure we have all the blocking deliverables tracked. If you find anything what might not be correct from your point of view, please let me know, so we can discuss it. Thanks for your cooperation.
[1] https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1427 [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Program_Management/ReleaseB locking/Fedora23
It doesn't seem entirely clear if the page is intended to be a list of all deliverables (which also notes whether each one is release blocking), or whether it's just intended to be a list of release blocking deliverables only. On the one hand, the page name has 'ReleaseBlocking' on it. On the other hand, the title is "List of Fedora 23 release deliverables". On the other other hand, the page lists several non-blocking deliverables. On the other other other hand, it's missing many more. See the end of this mail for a list of all (I think) media on the mirrors for F22 Beta TC1 (this list will be missing non-mirrored media like AMIs).
I'm surprised the Cloud AMIs are not listed. The various Atomic and Docker images are not listed either as blocking or non-blocking; is their status decided?
I've been trying to refer to the 'DVD' as 'offline' lately, since calling it 'the DVD' is a bit of a misnomer when most of the time it gets written to a USB stick. But it's not a big deal.
There is, to my knowledge, no "Xfce Live Image (arm)", exactly. ARM disk images are not the same thing as live images. To my knowledge the two release-blocking media for ARM are the armhfp minimal disk image and the armhfp Xfce disk image.
There is something of a 'jurisdiction overlap' here, as the release criteria already define some release blocking deliverables:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Template:Release_criteria_preamble
"The term release-blocking images means all the images in which bugs are currently considered capable of blocking a Fedora release. The current set of release-blocking images includes the images defined by the three primary Products - Server, Workstation and Cloud - in their product requirement documents and/or technical specifications, and the KDE live image."
We should probably clarify whether we intend the new page to be the canonical reference, in which case the criteria should be updated, or if the new page is just kind of an informational listing and the release criteria still define the policy.
Having this page in fairly haphazardly-formatted human-readable text seems a bit clunky. I think it might be nicer to have it in some standardized format (json or yaml or something) and generate a human- readable version from that. Of course, someone would have to do it.
As a side note, the criteria definition is notably missing the blocking ARM images, if that remains the 'canonical' reference we should fix it.
Here is the list of all the images in F23 Beta TC1, according to fedfind (the name is fedfind's 'image.desc' property):
workstation live image for i386 workstation netinst image for i386 workstation boot image for i386 workstation live image for x86_64 workstation netinst image for x86_64 workstation boot image for x86_64 server dvd image for i386 server netinst image for i386 server boot image for i386 server dvd image for x86_64 server netinst image for x86_64 server boot image for x86_64 cloud netinst image for i386 cloud boot image for i386 cloud netinst image for x86_64 cloud boot image for x86_64 cloud cloud_atomic image for x86_64 cloud cloud_atomic image for x86_64 cloud atomic disk qcow image for x86_64 cloud atomic disk image for x86_64 cloud atomic vagrant libvirt image for x86_64 cloud atomic vagrant virtualbox image for x86_64 cloud base vagrant libvirt image for x86_64 cloud base vagrant virtualbox image for x86_64 kde live image for i386 kde live image for x86_64 xfce live image for i386 xfce live image for x86_64 soas live image for i386 soas live image for x86_64 mate live image for i386 mate live image for x86_64 cinnamon live image for i386 cinnamon live image for x86_64 lxde live image for i386 lxde live image for x86_64 design_suite live image for i386 games live image for i386 security live image for i386 design_suite live image for x86_64 games live image for x86_64 security live image for x86_64 docker filesystem image for x86_64 workstation disk image for armhfp server disk image for armhfp kde disk image for armhfp minimal disk image for armhfp xfce disk image for armhfp soas disk image for armhfp mate disk image for armhfp lxde disk image for armhfp
Thanks for your long feedback Adam :-) I will try to answer your question and I will hope I do not miss anything.
* Release blocking vs. Release non-blocking This has been discussed on the meeting [1] whether we should have only list of blocking deliverables as that is what we need now. However from the long-term point of view we would like to have list of non-blockig deliverables as well, to make sure we know what we are delivering. The current page [2] is a mix of both and I agree it is not consistent. Let consider this as the starting point with more work to be done here.
* Atomic & Docker Check the FESCo meeting minutes [1] starting at 18:06:21 - "the cloud people said no atomic"; "not a release blocker"
* Cloud AMI I am not sure whether this is blocking or not. Hopefully Cloud WG can provide us with a definitive answer [3].
* ARM platform I can not serve here as my ARM awareness is limited. Hopefully someone from FESCo can comment here. If not, I can open this issue on the next FESCo meeting (you will be welcomed to join).
* Template:Release criteria preamble [4] Thanks, I was not aware of this. I prefer to have just one page. Probably will be a good topic for the next FESCo meeting to clarify this. We can probably also use the list from TC1 and merge all these together.
* haphazardly-formatted human-readable text The page was the first attempt to have at least something for F23 release. We plan to have a machine-readable format in a future (check the list of actions/tasks [5] ).
Regards, Jan
[1] https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/teams/fesco/fesco.2015-09-02-18.00.log.htm... [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Program_Management/ReleaseBlocking/Fed... [3] https://fedorahosted.org/cloud/ticket/118#comment:2 [4] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Template:Release_criteria_preamble [5] https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1427#comment:30
On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 12:50 AM, Adam Williamson adamwill@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Wed, 2015-09-02 at 21:18 +0200, Jan Kurik wrote:
Hi,
in the past there was an issue with identification of deliverables which block a Fedora release. We were dealing with this issue specifically during Go/No-go meetings which is quite late for this kind of decisions. To solve this issue FESCo has started an activity [1] to identify these deliverables in advance. The list of blocking (as well as some non-blocking) deliverables for Fedora 23 is currently available on Wiki page [2].
You might want to check the list [2] to make sure we have all the blocking deliverables tracked. If you find anything what might not be correct from your point of view, please let me know, so we can discuss it. Thanks for your cooperation.
[1] https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1427 [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Program_Management/ReleaseB locking/Fedora23
It doesn't seem entirely clear if the page is intended to be a list of all deliverables (which also notes whether each one is release blocking), or whether it's just intended to be a list of release blocking deliverables only. On the one hand, the page name has 'ReleaseBlocking' on it. On the other hand, the title is "List of Fedora 23 release deliverables". On the other other hand, the page lists several non-blocking deliverables. On the other other other hand, it's missing many more. See the end of this mail for a list of all (I think) media on the mirrors for F22 Beta TC1 (this list will be missing non-mirrored media like AMIs).
I'm surprised the Cloud AMIs are not listed. The various Atomic and Docker images are not listed either as blocking or non-blocking; is their status decided?
I've been trying to refer to the 'DVD' as 'offline' lately, since calling it 'the DVD' is a bit of a misnomer when most of the time it gets written to a USB stick. But it's not a big deal.
There is, to my knowledge, no "Xfce Live Image (arm)", exactly. ARM disk images are not the same thing as live images. To my knowledge the two release-blocking media for ARM are the armhfp minimal disk image and the armhfp Xfce disk image.
There is something of a 'jurisdiction overlap' here, as the release criteria already define some release blocking deliverables:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Template:Release_criteria_preamble
"The term release-blocking images means all the images in which bugs are currently considered capable of blocking a Fedora release. The current set of release-blocking images includes the images defined by the three primary Products - Server, Workstation and Cloud - in their product requirement documents and/or technical specifications, and the KDE live image."
We should probably clarify whether we intend the new page to be the canonical reference, in which case the criteria should be updated, or if the new page is just kind of an informational listing and the release criteria still define the policy.
Having this page in fairly haphazardly-formatted human-readable text seems a bit clunky. I think it might be nicer to have it in some standardized format (json or yaml or something) and generate a human- readable version from that. Of course, someone would have to do it.
As a side note, the criteria definition is notably missing the blocking ARM images, if that remains the 'canonical' reference we should fix it.
Here is the list of all the images in F23 Beta TC1, according to fedfind (the name is fedfind's 'image.desc' property):
workstation live image for i386 workstation netinst image for i386 workstation boot image for i386 workstation live image for x86_64 workstation netinst image for x86_64 workstation boot image for x86_64 server dvd image for i386 server netinst image for i386 server boot image for i386 server dvd image for x86_64 server netinst image for x86_64 server boot image for x86_64 cloud netinst image for i386 cloud boot image for i386 cloud netinst image for x86_64 cloud boot image for x86_64 cloud cloud_atomic image for x86_64 cloud cloud_atomic image for x86_64 cloud atomic disk qcow image for x86_64 cloud atomic disk image for x86_64 cloud atomic vagrant libvirt image for x86_64 cloud atomic vagrant virtualbox image for x86_64 cloud base vagrant libvirt image for x86_64 cloud base vagrant virtualbox image for x86_64 kde live image for i386 kde live image for x86_64 xfce live image for i386 xfce live image for x86_64 soas live image for i386 soas live image for x86_64 mate live image for i386 mate live image for x86_64 cinnamon live image for i386 cinnamon live image for x86_64 lxde live image for i386 lxde live image for x86_64 design_suite live image for i386 games live image for i386 security live image for i386 design_suite live image for x86_64 games live image for x86_64 security live image for x86_64 docker filesystem image for x86_64 workstation disk image for armhfp server disk image for armhfp kde disk image for armhfp minimal disk image for armhfp xfce disk image for armhfp soas disk image for armhfp mate disk image for armhfp lxde disk image for armhfp -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net
-- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
On Thu, 3 Sep 2015 14:41:28 +0200 Jan Kurik jkurik@redhat.com wrote:
Thanks for your long feedback Adam :-) I will try to answer your question and I will hope I do not miss anything.
- Release blocking vs. Release non-blocking
This has been discussed on the meeting [1] whether we should have only list of blocking deliverables as that is what we need now. However from the long-term point of view we would like to have list of non-blockig deliverables as well, to make sure we know what we are delivering. The current page [2] is a mix of both and I agree it is not consistent. Let consider this as the starting point with more work to be done here.
IMHO, it should be "Release deliverables" and clearly mark blocking vs non blocking. We need the non blocking ones as well so we know if something is just missing or there's some issue with it, etc.
- Atomic & Docker
Check the FESCo meeting minutes [1] starting at 18:06:21 - "the cloud people said no atomic"; "not a release blocker"
But it should still be listed there as non blocking
- Cloud AMI
I am not sure whether this is blocking or not. Hopefully Cloud WG can provide us with a definitive answer [3].
Yeah, me either... but should be listed either way, IMHO.
kevin
-
Adam Williamson -
Jan Kurik -
Kevin Fenzi -
Orion Poplawski