4:39 p.m.
Hello to everyone,
I have a question about lifecycle, i read the draft proposal
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Server/Proposals/Server_Lifecycle , but that
is 2013 old ? Any actual news on this, i am about to deploy a freeipa
environment in one hand i have centos 7 ipa 4.1.0 and Fedora 21 server
4.1.2 with several bugs corrected in the other can anyone point me some
more recent direction in this topic. Regard
4:47 p.m.
On 3 April 2015 at 15:39, Carlos Raúl Laguna <carlosla1987(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hello to everyone,
I have a question about lifecycle, i read the draft proposal
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Server/Proposals/Server_Lifecycle , but
that is 2013 old ? Any actual news on this, i am about to deploy a
freeipa environment in one hand i have centos 7 ipa 4.1.0 and Fedora 21
server 4.1.2 with several bugs corrected in the other can anyone point me
some more recent direction in this topic. Regard
As far as I know, lifecycle is still the same as the main Fedora lifecycle
of one year from release. Part of this is that there is a lot still going
on in setting up the Server group. Trying to add in extended lifecycles and
such would happen after the basics of what was in Fedora Server were in
place. It also requires users like you to explain what they want in an
extended lifecycle and what resources they are going to bring to help meet
those needs.
_______________________________________________
server mailing list
server(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/server
--
Stephen J Smoogen.
6:43 p.m.
Thanks for your answer, Well my main concern in this use case (freeipa
environment) is the complexity of IPA it depend of many stuff and can be
easily broken if any of them fails. About the lifecycle I would not expect
5 years like ubuntu actually the draft proposal is pretty good to me,i
would like security update in the time between the release and seamlessly
upgrade between major software version. If i push fedora into production i
will require alike scenario lab to test the incoming changes and feedback
the community. Regards
2015-04-03 17:47 GMT-04:00 Stephen John Smoogen <smooge(a)gmail.com>:
On 3 April 2015 at 15:39, Carlos Raúl Laguna <carlosla1987(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hello to everyone,
> I have a question about lifecycle, i read the draft proposal
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Server/Proposals/Server_Lifecycle , but
> that is 2013 old ? Any actual news on this, i am about to deploy a
> freeipa environment in one hand i have centos 7 ipa 4.1.0 and Fedora 21
> server 4.1.2 with several bugs corrected in the other can anyone point
> me some more recent direction in this topic. Regard
>
>
As far as I know, lifecycle is still the same as the main Fedora lifecycle
of one year from release. Part of this is that there is a lot still going
on in setting up the Server group. Trying to add in extended lifecycles and
such would happen after the basics of what was in Fedora Server were in
place. It also requires users like you to explain what they want in an
extended lifecycle and what resources they are going to bring to help meet
those needs.
> _______________________________________________
> server mailing list
> server(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/server
>
--
Stephen J Smoogen.
_______________________________________________
server mailing list
server(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/server
3:54 a.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
Would the Fedora Server replace CentOS in the future?
Franklin
On 04/04/2015 05:39 AM, Carlos Raúl Laguna wrote:
Hello to everyone,
Ihave a question about lifecycle, i read the draft proposal
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Server/Proposals/Server_Lifecycle , but
that is 2013 old ? Any actual news on this, i am about to deploy a
freeipa environment in one hand i have centos 7 ipa 4.1.0 and Fedora 21
server 4.1.2 with several bugs corrected in the other can anyone point
me some more recent direction in this topic. Regard
_______________________________________________
server mailing list
server(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/server
- --
Skype: touch21st, Gtalk: touch21st, Yahoo/MSN:franklinwang36@yahoo.com
Xing/Linkedin: Franklin Wang
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
iF4EAREIAAYFAlUfpuIACgkQHNPJJKP5Nja8nwD7BNq+ndAWGbb9owyuS1PQUFi4
kiRvukIBpQVR6txluZwA/3lRtxHnLtl7VZCFpy+5QPLmZGnmMZ7iHTckREBnDc8z
=9hYd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
4:26 a.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
I don't think so. Red Hat don't like CentOS very much, for it's not
another product, and no income for Red Hat.
Franklin
On 04/04/2015 04:59 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 04.04.2015 um 10:54 schrieb Franklin Wang:
> Would the Fedora Server replace CentOS in the future?
don't get me wrong but that question is nonsense
CentOS is a completly different project based on RHEL and so no one
will replace
the other in any direction
_______________________________________________
server mailing list
server(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/server
- --
Skype: touch21st, Gtalk: touch21st, Yahoo/MSN:franklinwang36@yahoo.com
Xing/Linkedin: Franklin Wang
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
iF4EAREIAAYFAlUfrmMACgkQHNPJJKP5NjZ/mAD/R1cVtUVmbDpAqoWx0t/PKo5V
40CbytlDP0iwh4F5YPAA/j5roH9hr4m0WwXN50sWlOCj2SKgmpC65nbz6G4yBhyJ
=63QP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
6:07 a.m.
Am 04.04.2015 um 11:26 schrieb Franklin Wang:
I don't think so. Red Hat don't like CentOS very much, for
it's not
another product, and no income for Red Hat.
*lol* you have no clue about the philosophy of Redhat and if you would
read serious IT news at least 5 years back you would have heard multiple
times from the CEO itself that they have no problem with CentOS because
over the long it brings new customers when they need support with and
easy migration path and the other CentOS users wouldn't be anyways customers
at least after 2014 "Red Hat don't like CentOS very much" is just
laughable because
http://www.redhat.com/de/about/press-releases/red-hat-and-centos-join-forces
as well as
Domain Name:CENTOS.ORG
Registrant Name:Red Hat, Inc.
Registrant Organization:Red Hat, Inc.
Registrant Street: 100 East Davie Street
Registrant City:Raleigh
Registrant State/Province:NC
Registrant Postal Code:27601
Registrant Country:US
Registrant Phone:+1.9197543700
Registrant Phone Ext:
Registrant Fax: +1.9197543704
Registrant Fax Ext:
Registrant Email:domainadmin@redhat.com
so please inform yourself *before* talking nonsense
On 04/04/2015 04:59 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>
> Am 04.04.2015 um 10:54 schrieb Franklin Wang:
>> Would the Fedora Server replace CentOS in the future?
>
> don't get me wrong but that question is nonsense
>
> CentOS is a completly different project based on RHEL and so no one
will replace the other in any direction
8:45 a.m.
On Sat, 2015-04-04 at 17:26 +0800, Franklin Wang wrote:
I don't think so. Red Hat don't like CentOS very much, for
it's not
another product, and no income for Red Hat.
I think you should read this:
http://community.redhat.com/centos-faq/
Simo.
--
Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York
9:33 a.m.
On Sat, Apr 04, 2015 at 04:54:58PM +0800, Franklin Wang wrote:
Would the Fedora Server replace CentOS in the future?
We hope that ideas from Fedora Server will flow into CentOS (and other
downstream distributions!), and that users of those distributions who
are interested in the cutting edge — either as users or as active
participants in creating the direction — will engage with Fedora
Server in a virtuous cycle.
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader
7:59 p.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
Maybe CentOS and Fedora server now would be Fedora server stable and
beta edition.
Frank
On 04/06/2015 10:33 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Sat, Apr 04, 2015 at 04:54:58PM +0800, Franklin Wang wrote:
> Would the Fedora Server replace CentOS in the future?
We hope that ideas from Fedora Server will flow into CentOS (and other
downstream distributions!), and that users of those distributions who
are interested in the cutting edge — either as users or as active
participants in creating the direction — will engage with Fedora
Server in a virtuous cycle.
- --
Skype: touch21st, Gtalk: touch21st, Yahoo/MSN:franklinwang36@yahoo.com
Xing/Linkedin: Franklin Wang
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
iF4EAREIAAYFAlUlzvkACgkQHNPJJKP5NjbJugD9GtzUxYpIoMVVxKeTVDWEiIUF
KrdoPhYY+/OHQiW7ANUA/3A18sCpJW6tVLssKphkB+B21J8Adg8p+ASeFMRq3D8N
=v7gw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
8:12 a.m.
On Thu, 2015-04-09 at 08:59 +0800, Franklin Wang wrote:
Maybe CentOS and Fedora server now would be Fedora server stable and
beta edition.
There's no arguing that RHEL Server will eventually be derived in part
(not necessarily in whole) from Fedora Server, but to call Fedora
Server a Beta of RHEL/CentOS is not really accurate. They are
definitely their own projects; not everything Fedora Server does will
end up in RHEL.
That said, it's reasonable to assume that the work we do in Fedora
Server will flow into the enterprise releases if they prove to be well-
received and significant improvements on the state of the art.
7:43 p.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
Yes, Fedora's a community distro supported by Red Hat and Fedora
community. I want to try the server edition later.
On 04/09/2015 09:12 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
On Thu, 2015-04-09 at 08:59 +0800, Franklin Wang wrote:
> Maybe CentOS and Fedora server now would be Fedora server stable and
> beta edition.
>
>
There's no arguing that RHEL Server will eventually be derived in part
(not necessarily in whole) from Fedora Server, but to call Fedora
Server a Beta of RHEL/CentOS is not really accurate. They are
definitely their own projects; not everything Fedora Server does will
end up in RHEL.
That said, it's reasonable to assume that the work we do in Fedora
Server will flow into the enterprise releases if they prove to be well-
received and significant improvements on the state of the art.
_______________________________________________
server mailing list
server(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/server
- --
Skype: touch21st, Gtalk: touch21st, Yahoo/MSN:franklinwang36@yahoo.com
Xing/Linkedin: Franklin Wang
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
iF4EAREIAAYFAlUnHMUACgkQHNPJJKP5NjbBKAD+PJfr5e1optmK6tS5WiGjBApu
xjXhqHVRtZSHYb/hIVkA/ivF3qw4Ru+inrO6oHowb4EUCzGMEuyw9J7UMaXbq5qU
=VU7r
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
5:58 a.m.
----- Original Message -----
Hello to everyone,
I have a question about lifecycle, i read the draft proposal
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Server/Proposals/Server_Lifecycle , but that
is 2013 old ? A ny actual news on this, i am about to deploy a freeipa
environment in one hand i have centos 7 ipa 4.1.0 and Fedora 21 server 4.1.2
with several bugs corrected in the other can anyone point me some more
recent direction in this topic. Regard
Hi,
and thanks for a very good question. One reason we split Fedora into several
products was that each product has different needs and one idea was to have
different lifecycle for each product too. Unfortunately, splitting Fedora
to three products does not mean we will have three times bigger manpower. And
it's current showstopper for different lifecycle for Server product. So the
prerequisite is automation on all the places - release engineering, QA, CI...
We're not yet there but we have to move that direction to make the Fedora
Project scale. AutoQA is one example.
Once we have it in place, we can for sure restart the discussion about life
cycles and every hand helping in this area would be very appreciated!
Jaroslav
_______________________________________________
server mailing list
server(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/server
3302
days inactive
3309
days old
server@lists.fedoraproject.org
12 comments
8 participants
participants (8)
-
Carlos Raúl Laguna -
Franklin Wang -
Jaroslav Reznik -
Matthew Miller -
Reindl Harald -
Simo Sorce -
Stephen Gallagher -
Stephen John Smoogen