On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 5:05 PM Kevin Fenzi <kevin(a)scrye.com> wrote:
On Sat, Jan 23, 2021 at 05:55:03PM +0100, Peter Boy wrote:
> During our IRC meeting last Wednesday we had agreed that I would make a first draft
proposal for contents of a possible Fedora Server box on the docs landing page (as to the
already existing ones on IoT, CoreOS etc).
>
> It is now available at
https://pboy.fedorapeople.org/FedoraServerDocpageProposal_v1-0.odt
>
> Please, comment here on the mailing list (if possible use the item numbers as
reference) or modify the text directly and send it to me (for the time being, improvement
is in progress).
This looks great!
I think wherever we can we should share docs to the main documentation
project, but I think server specific things might be fine in their own
section.
One small thing that might be good to add is 'differences between the
server edition and other fedora editions'. ie, we default to xfs instead
of btrfs and we have a different default partitioning setup, etc.
Perhaps the Server WG might consider postponing this portion, pending
a new evaluation?
* All the arguments in favor of Btrfs by default for Workstation apply
even more strongly for Server, i.e. they're even more compelling.
* That CentOS Stream will track just ahead of RHEL gives RHEL the
flexibility to continue to be prepared to do whatever RHEL wants to
do, and permits Fedora to continue to lead, be first, and seek
relevant features on their own merits.
* The existing layout was decided at a time when containers used
dm-thin directly (outside of LVM) hence the reservation of space "to
be determined" by the user following an installation. This might be
due for a refresh anyway.
* Both the overlayfs (on XFS or Btrfs) and Btrfs (leveraging btrfs
snapshots) workflows are more common than dm-thin or VFS container
workflows.
* There are other relevant possibilities: LVM thin provisioning, and Stratis.
--
Chris Murphy