server September 2024

server@lists.fedoraproject.org

7 participants
21 discussions

HTTP Apache Web Server issue and bug unprocessed report
by Peter Boy 12 Jan '25

12 Jan '25

Hi folks, We have a serious issue with the current Apache httpd package, which is an indispensable service for a server these days. The issue is basically the default configuration as provided by the package: - if you create just one server in den .conf directory, it results in a non-functional https configuration - the configuration uses items, that are deprecated since version 2.4 - the default layout of the default configuration is currently not suitable I wrote a bug report about it: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2258121 Unfortunately we are experiencing a common Fedora problem, nobody responds to it and the bug reports are left unprocessed and pile up. And because none of the maintainers respond at all, we have now also missed all the deadlines for improving something for f40. Technically an improvement is more than simple. It’s just a change in the configuration files, as far as I see. Any idea how to proceed with this? - Would someone take the bug report and check my analyses? - Is there any way to bring this forward? - Should we create a new https-server package which takes the binaries and provides an alternative configuration? Probably similar to default-editor-vim / default-editor-nano? As it currently stands, we are in no way competitive with, for example, Debian or ArchLinux. -- Peter Boy https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pboy PBoy(a)fedoraproject.org Timezone: CET (UTC+1) / CEST (UTC+2) Fedora Server Edition Working Group member Fedora Docs team contributor and board member Java developer and enthusiast

4 8

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

Improving our release testing efforts – Attempting to summarize our discussion
by Peter Boy 16 Oct '24

16 Oct '24

At our last meeting https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/meeting_matrix_fedoraproject-org/2024-09-…) I had agreed to try to summarize our current state of discussion and to describe a possible solution. Here we go. We discuss this topic for a long time, the initial tracking issue #63 (https://pagure.io/fedora-server/issue/63) is 2 years old. Our initial intention was (and still is) * Systematization of activities according to criteria and objective needs * As a supplement to automatic tests and aspects that may not be amenable to automatic testing * Integration and coordination with distribution-wide QA * Discovery of new problems for which, of course, there are no automated tests (yet). * This includes, among other things, monitoring the release changes that could potentially have side effects for Server. * Checking the documentation for necessary updates Topic "WHAT to test" ==================== One position was/is that manual testing is more or less completely redundant because everything relevant is now covered by automated testing. One argument against this is that in the past, some problems were only noticed and found in the course of manual testing (e.g. software raid when switching to GPT) or were not found at all or not in time because manual testing of a release was not carried out or was insufficient (e.g. the problems with LVM administration, one of the most important functionality for Server). And somehow it doesn't feel right not to test our installation media at all and use it to perform an installation or update for the first time after the release has been published. I suppose it is agreeable, "it is good to have human testing of the deliverables written to real physical media on real physical systems" (adamwill). And this is exactly what we did in the past. Sometimes our manual testing program included our central services, virtualization and containerization, which are highly consequential in the event of a failure. Additionally, is seems to be agreeable, "to test whatever workflows (we) have that *aren't* covered in the validation tests" (adamwill), although we may need to clarify, what "validation tests" do exactly cover. Probably, we agree about the following list of human / manual test tasks: * test DVD installation media on physikal hardware * test netboot installation media on physikal hardware * test VM (KVM) instantiation including first steps after first boot * in both cases checking: **** Everything works without breakage **** No distortion of the graphical or terminal output. **** No irritating, inaccurate or misleading error messages. **** besides the graphical guided steps, check shell access (<F1> etc) inkl. access to log files, print screen etc. **** Accuracy of the relevant documentation * In case of DVD installation, additionally (here running on hardware) **** Installing virtualization **** Installing containerization systemd-nspawn **** Installing containerization podman (as soon as we have documentation and procedures ready) * Test the dnf upgrade procedure on hardware and on a "real life" instance, not just the minimal default * Test the dnf upgrade procedure on a "real life" VM instance, not just the minimal default * Create a list of any special or one-off tests that are likely to be needed, based on the list of changes **** Perform and monitor these tests Topic "HOW to test" ==================== Previously, we created a corresponding list as a tracking issue. For this release, I created a wiki page, which is easier to use. As adamwill noted, this page "definitely shouldn't exist, we should fold anything important it covers into one of the existing pages". It takes us away from our goal from the very beginning of aligning testing with the distribution QA. It is a stopgap solution because the current pages do not offer us this capability. To organize the test practically, we need a concise and clear list of all the tasks that need to be completed and that we can “tick off”. It would be good to have a structure like the one offered by the wiki page (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Server/QA_Manual_Testing_Overview) And nothing that is not part of the server test program belongs on this page. It would be really great if the current QA pages could be added to or changed accordingly. A good starting page would be the server page that is now sent in the announcement emails: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_41_Branched_20240924.n.0… We should remove all items that have nothing to do with Server, starting with the download list. The test matrix and coverage page / lists should be split into automated tests and manual/human tests. The lists themselves can probably consist largely of annotated links to existing pages, but preferably with anchors directly to the relevant spot. And they should already indicate who tested and, above all, with which result. And it must be clear at a glance what has not yet been tested. And we need a place for one-off, release-specific tests, should the need arise. Topic "SUPPLEMENTING the tests" =============================== Of our server-specific services (or roles), only two are currently covered by tests: PostgreSQL and IPA. This needs to be completed. The process is: 1. define these as blocking roles in the prd/tech spec 2. cover them in the release criteria 3. write wiki test cases 4. automate them The first task is done. We should continue with the second one. Pragmatically, we should focus on the services for which documentation and procedures already exist: virtualization, containerization (nspawn), web server and NFS server. The biggest issue might be the Apache server. Its current installation procedure effectively results in an unusable and broken instance. There is a lot of work to be done. But we should discuss this separately from the general release tests. We have tracking issue #61 for this (https://pagure.io/fedora-server/issue/61) -- Peter Boy https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pboy PBoy(a)fedoraproject.org Timezone: CET (UTC+1) / CEST (UTC+2) Fedora Server Edition Working Group member Fedora Docs team contributor and board member Java developer and enthusiast

3 2

Agenda Items on 2024-10-02 17:00 ==UTC== meeting
by Peter Boy 30 Sep '24

30 Sep '24

The upcoming meeting will be held on ========================================================================== Fedora Server MATRIX meeting Wednesday, Oct 02 17:00 ==UTC== https://matrix.to/#/#meeting:fedoraproject.org?web-instance[element.io]=cha… ========================================================================== Please, check your local time using date -d '2024-10-02 17:00UTC' ==== Agenda ==== #link https://pagure.io/fedora-server/report/Meeting To be able to discuss all topics on the agenda and to prevent us from repeatedly putting off topics that have not been dealt with, we should set time limits for the individual items on the agenda. If we need more time, we should continue on the mailing list. To recap our discussion on last meeting see https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/server-working-group/wg-minutes-2024/ === 1. Follow up actions and announcements === === 2. Testing Release 41 !link https://pagure.io/fedora-server/issue/144 ===> Please comment on and add proposals to <=== !link https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/server@lists.fedoraproject.or… We have to determine how to proceed with our test efforts. 30 mins === 3. LVM2 default configuration change !link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247872 There seems to a final solution in place. Please check yourself! 10 mins === 4. Server user poll !link https://pagure.io/fedora-server/issue/145 Draft poll questions !link https://hackmd.io/@pboy/ByguCouphC On mailing list: !link https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/server@lists.fedoraproject.or… !link https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/server@lists.fedoraproject.or… 20 mins === 5. Open Floor For any additions or changes, please reply to this email. For an overview about current tasks look at: https://pagure.io/fedora-server/boards/Works%20in%20progress ===== Pending Topics for Follow-Up Meetings ===== === Using Ansible to install and configure Wildfly !link https://pagure.io/fedora-server/issue/60 === Fedora Server in a virtualized runtime environment === link https://pagure.io/fedora-server/issue/110 === Revisiting Fedora Server quality criteria and procedures link https://pagure.io/fedora-server/issue/63 === Ansible assisted installation and configuration of NFS service === !link https://pagure.io/fedora-server/issue/138 -- Peter Boy https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pboy PBoy(a)fedoraproject.org Timezone: CET (UTC+1) / CEST (UTC+2) Fedora Server Edition Working Group member Fedora Docs team contributor and board member Java developer and enthusiast

1 0

2024-09-30 @ 16:00 UTC - Fedora 41 Blocker Review Meeting
by Adam Williamson 28 Sep '24

28 Sep '24

# F10 Blocker Review meeting # Date: 2024-09-30 # Time: 16:00 UTC # Location: https://matrix.to/#/#blocker-review:fedoraproject.org?web-instance[element.… Hi folks! It's time for a Fedora 41 blocker review meeting! We have 1 proposed blocker and 2 proposed freeze exceptions for Final. Here is a handy link which should show you the meeting time in your local time: https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Fedora+41+Blocker… The meeting will be on Matrix. Click the link above to join in a web client - you can authenticate with your FAS account - or use a dedicated client of your choosing. 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/ . Remember, you can also now vote on bugs outside of review meetings! If you look at the bug list in the blockerbugs app, you'll see links labeled "Vote!" next to all proposed blockers and freeze exceptions. Those links take you to tickets where you can vote. https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review has instructions on how exactly you do it. We usually go through the tickets shortly before the meeting and apply any clear votes, so the meeting will just cover bugs where there wasn't a clear outcome in the ticket voting yet. **THIS MEANS IF YOU VOTE NOW, THE MEETING WILL BE SHORTER!** 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 F40 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 Have a good weekend and see you on Monday! [0] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Release_Criteria -- Adam Williamson (he/him/his) Fedora QA Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @adamw@fosstodon.org https://www.happyassassin.net

1 0

Today's meeting minutes
by Peter Boy 25 Sep '24

25 Sep '24

• Server user poll ================== We decided to use the current version with all inserted modifications and with the shorter of the formulated alternatives on hackmd.io. Mowest will create a Lime survey version of the discussed draft and reach out to Justin to put the project forward. • Testing Release 41 ==================== We agreed to continue the discussion on the mailing list due to running out of time here. See pboy: Improving our release testing efforts. An attempt to summarize our discussion (https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/server@lists.fedoraproject.or…) We will begin our next meeting with this topic! For details see our Working Group project page at https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/server-working-group/wg-minutes-2024/ == Please take some time to discuss this! == -- Peter Boy https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pboy PBoy(a)fedoraproject.org Timezone: CET (UTC+1) / CEST (UTC+2) Fedora Server Edition Working Group member Fedora Docs team contributor and board member Java developer and enthusiast

1 0

Proposed agenda Items on 2024-09-25 17:00 ==UTC== meeting
by Peter Boy 24 Sep '24

24 Sep '24

The upcoming meeting will be held on ========================================================================== Fedora Server MATRIX meeting Wednesday, Sep 25 17:00 ==UTC== https://matrix.to/#/#meeting:fedoraproject.org?web-instance[element.io]=cha… ========================================================================== Please, check your local time using date -d '2024-09-25 17:00UTC' ==== Agenda ==== #link https://pagure.io/fedora-server/report/Meeting To be able to discuss all topics on the agenda and to prevent us from repeatedly putting off topics that have not been dealt with, we should set time limits for the individual items on the agenda. If we need more time, we should continue on the mailing list. To recap our discussion on last meeting see https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/server-working-group/wg-minutes-2024/ === 1. Follow up actions and announcements === === 2. Server user poll !link https://pagure.io/fedora-server/issue/145 Draft poll questions !link https://hackmd.io/@pboy/ByguCouphC On mailing list: !link https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/server@lists.fedoraproject.or… !link https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/server@lists.fedoraproject.or… This is our main topic today. 30 mins === 3. Testing Release 41 !link https://pagure.io/fedora-server/issue/144 !link https://pagure.io/fedora-server/issue/63 Additionally I made a draft to systematize our testing procedure: !link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Server/QA_Manual_Testing_Overview Attempt to summarize our discussion so far: !link https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/server@lists.fedoraproject.or… We have to determine how to proceed with our test efforts. 20 mins === 4. Open Floor For any additions or changes, please reply to this email. For an overview about current tasks look at: https://pagure.io/fedora-server/boards/Works%20in%20progress ===== Pending Topics for Follow-Up Meetings ===== === Using Ansible to install and configure Wildfly !link https://pagure.io/fedora-server/issue/60 === Fedora Server in a virtualized runtime environment === link https://pagure.io/fedora-server/issue/110 === Revisiting Fedora Server quality criteria and procedures link https://pagure.io/fedora-server/issue/63 === Ansible assisted installation and configuration of NFS service === !link https://pagure.io/fedora-server/issue/138 -- Peter Boy https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pboy PBoy(a)fedoraproject.org Timezone: CET (UTC+1) / CEST (UTC+2) Fedora Server Edition Working Group member Fedora Docs team contributor and board member Java developer and enthusiast

2 1

[Fedocal] Reminder meeting : Fedora Server WG
by pboy＠fedoraproject.org 24 Sep '24

24 Sep '24

Dear all, You are kindly invited to the meeting: Fedora Server WG on 2024-09-25 from 17:00:00 to 18:00:00 UTC At not(a)irc.libera.chat The meeting will be about: Standing meeting of the Fedora Server Edition Working Group The meeting will be held on Matrix: https://matrix.to/#/#meeting:fedoraproject.org?web-instance[element.io]=cha… More information available at: [https://pagure.io/fedora-server/report/Meeting](https://pagure.io/fedora-se… Source: https://calendar.fedoraproject.org//meeting/10875/

1 0

[Test-Announce]2024-09-23 @ 16:00 UTC - Fedora 41 Blocker Review Meeting
by Frantisek Zatloukal 21 Sep '24

21 Sep '24

# F41 Blocker Review meeting # Date: 2024-09-23 # Time: 16:00 UTC # Location: https://matrix.to/#/#blocker-review:fedoraproject.org?web-instance[element.… Hi folks! It's time for a Fedora 41 blocker review meeting! We have 2 proposed blockers for Final. Here is a handy link which should show you the meeting time in your local time: https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Fedora+41+Blocker… The meeting will be on Matrix. Click the link above to join in a web client - you can authenticate with your FAS account - or use a dedicated client of your choosing. If you have time today, 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/ . Remember, you can also now vote on bugs outside of review meetings! If you look at the bug list in the blockerbugs app, you'll see links labeled "Vote!" next to all proposed blockers and freeze exceptions. Those links take you to tickets where you can vote. https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review has instructions on how exactly you do it. We usually go through the tickets shortly before the meeting and apply any clear votes, so the meeting will just cover bugs where there wasn't a clear outcome in the ticket voting yet. **THIS MEANS IF YOU VOTE NOW, THE MEETING WILL BE SHORTER!** 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 F40 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 Have a good day and see you on Monday! [0] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Release_Criteria -- Best regards / S pozdravem, František Zatloukal Senior Quality Engineer Red Hat

1 0

Fedora Server Survey Draft
by mowest 18 Sep '24

18 Sep '24

I just want to give an encouragement to look over the "work in progress" Fedora Server Survey. I'm excited about this project for our Working Group. Peter Boy started a draft, and I made a number of edits to the draft today. I also added some goals for the survey at the top of the document to help guide our decisions and formation of questions. I believe there is still work that could be done to improve the questions before we take them and input them into the Lime Survey software. Please take a look at the following document and consider: 1. Do we have the right goals for this survey? (Too many, too few, not the right goals...) 2. Do we have the right questions to reach the proposed goals for the survey? (Too many, too few, not the right questions for our goals) 3. Are the questions clear and providing data we can use? (i.e. open input questions will create extra work to tabulate the results) The more feedback the better. Peter Boy has planned that the survey will be at the top of the agenda for next week's meeting so your input before then is appreciated. Draft of Survey: https://hackmd.io/@pboy/ByguCouphC -- mowest ---------> discoverfoss.com

1 0

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

server September 2024