server October 2017

server@lists.fedoraproject.org

7 participants
11 discussions

Proposal: Changes to Fedora Server default partitioning scheme
by Stephen Gallagher 13 Dec '24

13 Dec '24

The following proposal comes out of the discussion at this weeks Server SIG meeting[1] Fedora Server will have: * / (root) will be a minimum of 2 GiB and a maximum of 15 GiB * SWAP will continue to be calculated automatically based on available RAM on the system * All unused space will be assigned to a volume group and available to be assigned to new partitions or extend existing partitions. * Anaconda will continue to handle the appropriate EFI and /boot settings We also discussed during the meeting whether we should have a separate /var partition by default, but the general sense was that we might be better served by developing a mechanism to allow partitions to be split from existing mount points, which would be more flexible going forward. As we did not have quorum in the meeting by the point we got to this proposal, I'm taking it to the list for discussion and votes. For the record, the current behavior of the partitioning scheme is for / to be given up to 50 GiB of space and then any remaining space after that is assigned to a separate /home partition. [1] https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2016-03-15/serversig.201…

4 8

Re: Proposal to cancel 2017-10-31 meeting
by Michael J Wolf 30 Oct '17

30 Oct '17

+1 Mike Wolf IBM Power Linux Development Rochester, Mn Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh(a)redhat.com> wrote on 10/30/2017 08:04:06 AM: > From: Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh(a)redhat.com> > To: "server(a)lists.fedoraproject.org" <server(a)lists.fedoraproject.org> > Date: 10/30/2017 08:04 AM > Subject: Proposal to cancel 2017-10-31 meeting > > It's Halloween and my kids would like to go trick-or-treating :) > _______________________________________________ > server mailing list -- server(a)lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to server-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org

1 0

Proposal to cancel 2017-10-31 meeting
by Stephen Gallagher 30 Oct '17

30 Oct '17

It's Halloween and my kids would like to go trick-or-treating :)

2 1

2017-10-30 @ 16:00 UTC - Fedora 27 Blocker Review Meeting
by Adam Williamson 30 Oct '17

30 Oct '17

# F27 Blocker Review meeting # Date: 2017-10-30 # Time: 16:00 UTC # Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.freenode.net Hi folks! We currently have 2 proposed Final blockers, 1 proposed Final freeze exception, and 1 proposed Server Beta blocker, so let's have a Fedora 27 blocker review meeting. If you have time tonight, you can take a look at the proposed or accepted blockers before the meeting - the full lists can be found here: https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/ . 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 F27 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 Note that for the special case of the Server release being split from the main release stream for Fedora 27, we have created separate Server blocker tracking bugs and will be following the same basic process for the Server release dates using those trackers. Have a good night and see you tomorrow! [0] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Release_Criteria -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net

1 0

Release criteria proposal: clarify upgrade requirements
by Adam Williamson 26 Oct '17

26 Oct '17

Hi folks! So at the most recent blocker review meeting, we discussed the intent of the release criteria as regards upgrades. At present we have one criterion, at Beta: "For each one of the release-blocking package sets, it must be possible to successfully complete a direct upgrade from fully updated installations of the last two stable Fedora releases with that package set installed." Now my *intent* in writing this was that it should cover *only* out-of- the-box installs of the release-blocking package sets; nothing beyond out-of-the-box functionality was supposed to be covered. However, there seemed to be strong agreement that failure of a release- blocking Server role to upgrade correctly should block the release. At least in my reading (and I wrote it!) the criterion doesn't really cover that. So I'm proposing changes to both make the meaning of the existing criterion more clear, and explicitly cover the thing we agreed should be covered. 1) Change the text of the existing criterion to read: "For each one of the release-blocking package sets, it must be possible to successfully complete a direct upgrade from a fully updated, clean default installation of each of the last two stable Fedora releases with that package set installed." 2) Add a new criterion to the Beta 'Server Product requirements' section, titled "Server upgrade requirements", text: "For each Featured Server Role, it must be possible to successfully complete a direct upgrade from a fully updated installation of each of the last two stable Fedora Server releases with that Server Role deployed. The upgraded system must meet all relevant release criteria, including criteria relating to functionality of the Server Role." How does that sound? Thanks for any feedback! -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net

2 1

2017-10-23 @ 16:00 UTC - Fedora 27 Blocker Review Meeting
by Adam Williamson 20 Oct '17

20 Oct '17

# F27 Blocker Review meeting # Date: 2017-10-23 # Time: 16:00 UTC # Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.freenode.net Hi folks! We currently have 8 proposed Final blockers, 9 proposed Final freeze exceptions, 5 proposed Server Beta blockers, and 1 proposed Server Beta freeze exception to review, so let's have a Fedora 27 blocker review meeting. If you have time this weekend, you can take a look at the proposed or accepted blockers before the meeting - the full lists can be found here: https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/ . 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 F27 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 Note that for the special case of the Server release being split from the main release stream for Fedora 27, we have created separate Server blocker tracking bugs and will be following the same basic process for the Server release dates using those trackers. Have a good weekend and see you on Monday! [0] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Release_Criteria -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net

1 0

Fedora Release Engineering Status Report for F27 Deliverables
by Kate Carcia 20 Oct '17

20 Oct '17

Hi all, Please take a peak of the status report below which highlights ongoing F27 work the Fedora release engineering team is focusing on. Don't hesitate to reach out if you have questions. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ReleaseEngineering/StatusReport#17OCT2017 KAITLYN CARCIA PROJECT MANAGER, RCM Red Hat Westford <https://www.redhat.com/> T: +1-857-770-0448- M: +1-978-604-8667 IM: katec <https://red.ht/sig>

1 0

F27 Server-specific blocker/FE tracker bugs
by Adam Williamson 17 Oct '17

17 Oct '17

As we have decided to release F27 Server on a different cycle from the rest of F27, I thought it would make sense to have separate blocker/FE tracker bugs for Server. I have now created them and moved appropriate bugs to them, and updated blockerbugs to include the Server milestones: https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/milestone/27/server-beta/ https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/milestone/27/server-final/ https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1502880 (Beta blocker) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1502882 (Beta FE) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1502890 (Final blocker) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1502891 (Final FE) This should aid in tracking where we are with Server without having to mentally separate Server and 'regular' blockers. Please do use these trackers for proposing Server-specific blocker/FE bugs. Thanks folks! -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net

2 1

Chairperson needed for weekly meeting
by Stephen Gallagher 10 Oct '17

10 Oct '17

I have a conflict today and will not make it to the meeting. If someone else can run it, please reply and let people know. If no one does, consider it canceled for this week.

2 3

[CANCELED] Server SIG Weekly Meeting (2017-10-03)
by Stephen Gallagher 03 Oct '17

03 Oct '17

We have no agenda for today.

1 0

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

server October 2017