Criteria proposal: cover Server roles in upgrade criteria
by Adam Williamson
Preamble: I know we're planning to throw rolekit out entirely, but I
believe we're planning to continue to consider the actual functions
behind the roles (FreeIPA and postgres) as blocking, so I'd like to get
this done so we remember to include it in that change.
Postamble: Back in F27 cycle, specifically in the 2017-10-23 blocker
review meeting, we agreed to cover the release-blocking Server roles in
the upgrade criteria. That is noted here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1503321#c7
However, we never actually made the change. So, here I am proposing it!
We should change the Beta criterion 'Upgrade requirements' as follows.
Main text should go from:
"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."
to:
"For each one of the release-blocking package sets, and the package
sets for each of the release-blocking Server roles, 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."
I think that's actually all the change necessary, as the bullet point
"The upgraded system must meet all release criteria" then requires that
the upgraded roles actually work.
Thoughts? Thanks!
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net
4 years, 11 months
[Help Needed] Fedora Server's Mission and Goals
by Stephen Gallagher
During today's Server SIG IRC meeting[1], we discussed plans for Fedora 29
and onwards. In particular, we've decided that we're probably going to
retire the concept of "server roles" from our overall goals. Adam
Williamson -- representing Fedora QA -- raised the point that the related
release criteria and test goals come directly from the Fedora Server
Product Requirements Document (PRD) [2]. He correctly pointed out that we
should start by revising the PRD and have that filter down ultimately into
the release criteria.
Looking at the Fedora Wiki, the Fedora Server PRD is now over four years
old and thus is ripe for an update. To that end, we're going to start with
a brainstorming exercise to update our Mission Statement. The current
statement reads:
Fedora Server is a common base platform with "featured server roles" built
on top of it. We commit to produce, test, and distribute these server roles.
Clearly, this is no longer going to work for us, since we're planning to
retire the server role concept. So what I'd like is this: If you are
reading this, I'd like you to send me your view of what the
purpose/goals/efforts of Fedora Server should be over the next 2-3 years
(or even longer). I would ask that you send your thoughts directly to me,
not as a reply on the list. This is so as not to influence anyone else's
answers or to start a debate before the brainstorming is concluded. I will
gather the responses and send them back out to the list as a complete set
on Monday. The floodgates should then open to try to find the common
elements and start turning them into an actionable strategy (the discussion
will also continue at the Server SIG meeting on Tuesday).
Once that discussion settles down, I will take the major points we come to
agreement on and start putting together a draft of a new Products
Requirement Document. We can then discuss and tweak the PRD up to the
Fedora 29 System-Wide Change Proposal deadline, at which point the Server
SIG will submit its F29 Changes to FESCo.
Thank you all in advance for your help with this.
[1]
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2018-03-20/serversig.2...
[2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Server/Product_Requirements_Document
4 years, 12 months
Server SIG Weekly Meeting Minutes (2018-03-20)
by Stephen Gallagher
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
================================================================
#fedora-meeting-1: Fedora Server SIG Weekly Meeting (2018-03-20)
================================================================
Meeting started by sgallagh at 20:00:24 UTC. The full logs are available
athttps://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2018-03-20/serversig...
.
Meeting summary
- ---------------
* Roll Call (sgallagh, 20:00:24)
* Agenda (sgallagh, 20:03:23)
* Agenda Item: Server Roles (sgallagh, 20:03:28)
* Fedora 28 Beta and Server (sgallagh, 20:07:31)
* "we have nothing server specific that's unaddressed" -- adamw
(sgallagh, 20:09:21)
* aarch64 test status is presently indeterminate (sgallagh, 20:11:50)
* Server SIG members are politely asked to make themselves available
for testing and fire-fighting (sgallagh, 20:12:47)
* Server Roles (sgallagh, 20:22:02)
* ACTION: sgallagh to ask the Server SIG to privately send to him
their picture of what should be the goal of the next 2-3 year of the
Server Edition. (sgallagh, 20:39:59)
* Next week's Server SIG meeting will be a brainstorming discussion to
kick off a PRD revision. (sgallagh, 20:40:34)
* Open Floor (sgallagh, 20:40:49)
Meeting ended at 20:44:23 UTC.
Action Items
- ------------
* sgallagh to ask the Server SIG to privately send to him their picture
of what should be the goal of the next 2-3 year of the Server Edition.
Action Items, by person
- -----------------------
* sgallagh
* sgallagh to ask the Server SIG to privately send to him their
picture of what should be the goal of the next 2-3 year of the
Server Edition.
* **UNASSIGNED**
* (none)
People Present (lines said)
- ---------------------------
* sgallagh (75)
* adamw (24)
* zodbot (12)
* smooge (11)
* nirik (8)
* dperpeet (7)
* mjwolf (7)
* jwb (1)
Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4
.. _`MeetBot`: http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: Mailvelope v2.2.0
Comment: https://www.mailvelope.com
wkYEAREIABAFAlqxcsoJEHolVWI2uqOjAABAJACgl4B1WYSILdr+IVNlZc1F
RMi0mdcAoJjs2f2kUR37u1JA4aK+SefoXFFS
=cdfz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
5 years
Call for testing: more Fedora 28 Beta blocker-fixing updates
by Adam Williamson
Hey folks! Just a note that there are some more F28 Beta blocker-fixing
updates that could use some testing and feedback:
1. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-2c066076a2
This is an anaconda update that fixes a bug in recent versions: if you
did a live install and both created a user account and set a root
password, the root account wound up locked. You couldn't get into it.
Testing is quite easy: boot a recent live image (KDE live from a recent
F28 nightly is good), update all the anaconda packages, then run an
install, and during install, create a user account and set the root
password. Then check you can log in to the installed system as root.
2. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-8cff0f34f6
This FreeIPA update fixes logging into the web UI as a regular user.
Again, you can only really test this if you have or can set up a
testing FreeIPA deployment, we do not recommend upgrading production
deployments at this time.
Thanks folks!
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net
5 years
Call for testing: Fedora 28 blocker / FE updates
by Adam Williamson
Hi folks!
I'm not doing a full blocker status mail right now (it's Saturday...),
but we do have several updates intended to fix proposed or accepted
blocker or FE issues ATM. It'd be great if we could get testing on
these updates so they're ready to go (or, of course, if you find
issues, we know *not* to send them out). Here they are:
1. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-9877df9844
This is for shim-signed, part of UEFI booting, especially Secure Boot
booting. If you have an SB-enabled setup, please check you can boot
with the packages from this update, and +1 it if so.
2. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-5ebe0eb1f2
This is the GNOME 3.28.0 mega-update. It's proposed as an FE. It'd be
really useful to have lots of testing of it by Monday so we can make an
informed decision about whether it's safe to pull it in. Note, there's
a live image available for testing that includes the bits from this
update (thanks Kalev):
https://kalev.fedorapeople.org/Fedora-Workstation-Live-x86_64-28-20180315...
3. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-5a9e9a1142
This one should prevent anaconda from automatically quitting after a
Workstation live install. To test it, boot a recent Workstation live,
then update these packages before running an install. At the end of
install, you should see the 'Install complete' screen that requires you
to click 'Quit' before anaconda will close - it shouldn't just
automatically close anaconda (and auto-suspend the system, if you
hadn't moved the mouse for 20 minutes!) like before.
4. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-9053deff2a
This is related to this Change:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ThunderboltEnablement
If you have a Thunderbolt port and some kind of Thunderbolt accessory,
you should be able to test according to the 'How To Test' section of
the Change page.
5. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-79a0e88abe
This is for MATE. It's related to getting the correct desktop
background in. I'm not sure whether this update alone should result in
the correct background being included, or whether further changes are
needed after it lands. See
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1554475 for more details.
6. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-7f8b60cd0e
I believe this relates to upgrades from Fedora 27 to Fedora 28 for
x86_64 systems with the i686 nss-pem package installed (a common reason
for this is if you have 32-bit wine installed), so that's basically the
scenario to test: try that upgrade with and without updates-testing
enabled.
7. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-648a02fbac
This is just rebuilds of a bunch of different packages against OpenCV
3.4. There's no reason any of them should fail...if you happen to use
any of the packages in the update, please just check it still works at
least as well as before, and +1 the update.
Thanks a lot, folks!
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net
5 years