4:48 a.m.
So the F-9-based XS-0.6 is closed (at long last), and the next step is
to prep 0.7 based on F-11. Here is a rundown of the packaging /
installer work I think needs to be done:
=Rebuild packages, spec fixups=
Jerry Vonau has done a lot of the exploratory work, so mostly done I
think. Thanks! Still, might hit issues and cry for help...
=Switch from metapackage to 'groups'=
RFH: The repos I build have no 'groups' defined, and we need to
control livecdcreator/pungi and anaconda so that only the group (and
its deps) is included.
=Polish on the Anaconda / Installer=
- With the F11 buildsys tools maybe we can now replace fedora-logos properly.
- Anaconda on F11 seems to install from a bootable USB with less
crashes -- will want to streamline the process.
=Improve xs-config=
There are several ways in which xs-config can be a lot less intrusive,
for example using alternative init scripts (as we are doing with
'pgsql-xs' vs 'postgresql').
=FAQ=
Why F11? Because the XS needs to be stable, and doesn't need bleeding
edge, so targetting the "LTS" F11->RHEL6->CentOS path makes sense. The
XS team would like to spend more time working on "tools on top" and
less time tracking Fedora and regression-testing :-)
Why are these packages out of sync with Fedora (missing F-12, etc)?
The XS packages are still in flux and intrusive. And low-quality/risky
from a Fedora PoV. As things stabilize in the future it might make
sense to request inclusion.
cheers,
m
--
martin.langhoff(a)gmail.com
martin(a)laptop.org -- School Server Architect
- ask interesting questions
- don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first
- http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff
5:16 a.m.
Hi Martin,
0.6 looks like a great release.
On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 10:48 AM, Martin Langhoff
<martin.langhoff(a)gmail.com> wrote:
So the F-9-based XS-0.6 is closed (at long last), and the next step
is
to prep 0.7 based on F-11. Here is a rundown of the packaging /
installer work I think needs to be done:
=Rebuild packages, spec fixups=
Jerry Vonau has done a lot of the exploratory work, so mostly done I
think. Thanks! Still, might hit issues and cry for help...
=Switch from metapackage to 'groups'=
RFH: The repos I build have no 'groups' defined, and we need to
control livecdcreator/pungi and anaconda so that only the group (and
its deps) is included.
=Polish on the Anaconda / Installer=
- With the F11 buildsys tools maybe we can now replace fedora-logos properly.
- Anaconda on F11 seems to install from a bootable USB with less
crashes -- will want to streamline the process.
=Improve xs-config=
There are several ways in which xs-config can be a lot less intrusive,
for example using alternative init scripts (as we are doing with
'pgsql-xs' vs 'postgresql').
=FAQ=
Why F11? Because the XS needs to be stable, and doesn't need bleeding
edge, so targetting the "LTS" F11->RHEL6->CentOS path makes sense. The
XS team would like to spend more time working on "tools on top" and
less time tracking Fedora and regression-testing :-)
Why are these packages out of sync with Fedora (missing F-12, etc)?
The XS packages are still in flux and intrusive. And low-quality/risky
from a Fedora PoV. As things stabilize in the future it might make
sense to request inclusion.
I would encourage you to look at using F-12 rather than F-11. F-12
will be more likely to be the base for RHEL-6 than F-11 from what I've
heard so the move to CentOS 6 would be easier from that POV. F-12 is
pretty stable now, is feature complete and will be in beta in a week
or so and it will give you a 13 months of support from release rather
than the 6-7 that F-11 currently have rather than having something
based on a Fedora that's already EOL.
Either way let me know how i can help out.
Peter
5:33 a.m.
On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 12:16 PM, Peter Robinson <pbrobinson(a)gmail.com> wrote:
0.6 looks like a great release.
Thanks! 99.999998% of the code is Fedora so it's gotta be very good :-)
I would encourage you to look at using F-12 rather than F-11. F-12
will be more likely to be the base for RHEL-6 than F-11 from what I've
Hmmm! I understood that F-11 had a longer release cycle (with the
breaking and all, but also a slightly longer stabilization window) at
the expense of F-12.
The only reference I find of Fedora-12 perhaps becoming RHEL 6 is this
http://lwn.net/Articles/348141/
cheers,
m
--
martin.langhoff(a)gmail.com
martin(a)laptop.org -- School Server Architect
- ask interesting questions
- don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first
- http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff
6:07 a.m.
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 12:33, Martin Langhoff <martin.langhoff(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 12:16 PM, Peter Robinson
<pbrobinson(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> 0.6 looks like a great release.
Thanks! 99.999998% of the code is Fedora so it's gotta be very good :-)
> I would encourage you to look at using F-12 rather than F-11. F-12
> will be more likely to be the base for RHEL-6 than F-11 from what I've
Hmmm! I understood that F-11 had a longer release cycle (with the
breaking and all, but also a slightly longer stabilization window) at
the expense of F-12.
I think I told you that at the SugarCamp in Paris, because at this
time, that's what the rumours were about:
http://lwn.net/Articles/306807/ (that's the link I had given you at
that time, specifically saying that it was only a guess)
The problem is that we (Fedora) have absolutely no way to know for
sure what the next RHEL will be based on: that's Red Hat's business.
So all we can do is try to guess, but depending on their own
constraints, business, clients, etc... the rumours often change as
time goes :)
If you want to know that for sure, you should ask Red Hat about it. ;)
The only reference I find of Fedora-12 perhaps becoming RHEL 6 is
this
http://lwn.net/Articles/348141/
Actually, I read that more as « RHEL 6 will be based on F13 or a
future version of Fedora ». But like Spot says, we can't draw any
conclusion.
Best regards,
----------
Mathieu Bridon (bochecha)
6:26 a.m.
On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Mathieu Bridon (bochecha)
<bochecha(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
I think I told you that at the SugarCamp in Paris
You weren't the only one :-) and in general it seemed to make sense.
Ah, well. We're programmers, not mindreaders.
After a bit of thought, initially at least, 0.7 will be based on F11.
It is very hard for me to get my own code stable while the whole
distro is in flux. Maybe there is a good opportunity for a F-12 rebase
before 0.7.
cheers,
m
--
martin.langhoff(a)gmail.com
martin(a)laptop.org -- School Server Architect
- ask interesting questions
- don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first
- http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff
6:31 a.m.
On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 12:26 PM, Martin Langhoff
<martin.langhoff(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Mathieu Bridon (bochecha)
<bochecha(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> I think I told you that at the SugarCamp in Paris
You weren't the only one :-) and in general it seemed to make sense.
Ah, well. We're programmers, not mindreaders.
After a bit of thought, initially at least, 0.7 will be based on F11.
It is very hard for me to get my own code stable while the whole
distro is in flux. Maybe there is a good opportunity for a F-12 rebase
before 0.7.
Well if i can help out in any regards there feel free to ping me.
Cheers,
Peter
6:41 a.m.
On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 1:31 PM, Peter Robinson <pbrobinson(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Well if i can help out in any regards there feel free to ping me.
Thanks! Will keep the offer in mind :-)
m
--
martin.langhoff(a)gmail.com
martin(a)laptop.org -- School Server Architect
- ask interesting questions
- don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first
- http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff
5:55 a.m.
On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 11:48 AM, Martin Langhoff
<martin.langhoff(a)gmail.com> wrote:
So the F-9-based XS-0.6 is closed (at long last), and the next step
is
In the 0.6 set of packages there are 2 that stand out as generic
packages that Fedorans may find interesting.
Be warned though -
- The packaging is I think reasonably good but is probably not to
Fedora standards.
- They are orphaned upstream. Carrying them in the Fedora
repositories (and resulting increased exposure) may re-kindle interest
in them... or just place a bigger burden on packagers.
The packages are:
- usbmount
Homepage: http://usbmount.alioth.debian.org/
Git repo http://dev.laptop.org/git/users/martin/usbmount.git/
Full thread on why
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-olpc-list/2008-August/msg00004.html
- pam_sotp - Rahul Sundaram helped us with an initial package (thanks!)
http://www.cavecanen.org/cs/projects/pam_sotp/doc/0.3.3/manual.html
Spec http://sundaram.fedorapeople.org/packages/pam_sotp.spec
See also http://www.redhat.com/archives/rhl-devel-list/2008-October/msg02898.html
cheers,
m
--
martin.langhoff(a)gmail.com
martin(a)laptop.org -- School Server Architect
- ask interesting questions
- don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first
- http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff
5338
days inactive
5338
days old
7 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Martin Langhoff -
Mathieu Bridon -
Peter Robinson