Requesting approval to establish Fedora namespace presence in Ansible Galaxy for community automation content. As Ansible is promoting the new Collections packaging, it extends the ability to provide automation solutions in Galaxy, beyond only Ansible Roles to include additional modules and playbook solutions. Many projects such as https://linux-system-roles.github.io/ and https://github.com/freeipa/ansible-freeipa are providing Ansible solutions. This would allow for a better organized way to pull together various efforts already happening separately, under a more organized community of automation under the Fedora label.
What this would look like: Ansible Galaxy 1. Fedora (namespace for system roles collections) a. fedora.linux_system_roles -- Plumbing if you will to subsystems such as networking, storage, authentication and similar. Already released in rpm format and is upstream equivalent to RHEL system roles) -- Included as part of redhat.rhel_system_roles as supported content in Ansible's new Automation Hub 2. Fedora Solutions a. fedora.solutions -- Higher level end to end solutions upstream automation solutions, for example a complete freeIPA infrastructure running in a cloud environment. -- Automation for Fedora IoT solutions -- other automation solutions that are meaningful to end users -- May be included as part of redhat.rhel_solutions as supported content in Ansible's new Automation Hub
The idea sounds good. I have a few questions?
Who will maintain the Fedora Ansible namespace? What are the criteria for projects to be included? Who is already involved with this regarding the Fedora solutions? Are there people from FeeIPA or Fedora IoT already in the loop?
Who will maintain the Fedora Ansible namespace?
The maintainers will be the linux system roles team.
What are the criteria for projects to be included?
The project must be somehow related to Fedora/EL. For example, system roles directly manage Fedora system level components such as networking, storage, timesync. If someone outside of the group of maintainers wants their content (role/module/collection) included, they will contact the maintainers and ask for inclusion. The content will have to meet some criteria TBD (e.g. passes linters, checkers, has no license issues, has proper docs, etc.)
Who is already involved with this regarding the Fedora solutions?
No one, afaik.
Are there people from FeeIPA or Fedora IoT already in the loop?
FreeIPA, yes. IoT, I don't think so.
It's not clear to me why a Fedora namespace would be necessary here. Is the intent to publish roles that are Fedora Official[tm]?
This would allow for a better organized way to pull together various efforts already happening separately, under a more organized community of automation under the Fedora label.
Can you point to some of the places where this is happening in Fedora? Or are these activities happening outside of the Fedora umbrella but use Fedora?
It's not clear to me why a Fedora namespace would be necessary here.
It isn't strictly necessary, but it is convenient.
Is the intent to publish roles that are Fedora Official[tm]?
The intent is to publish roles that are the officially supported way to manage core Fedora components using Ansible, in conjunction with the maintainers of the Fedora components. For example, this will host the role for managing the official rsyslog application provided by Fedora, in conjunction with the maintainers of the Fedora rsyslog RPM package. This will host the role for managing Fedora networking, in conjunction with the maintainers of the Fedora networking packages (e.g. NetworkManager). And, in some cases, roles/modules that these components depend on, which don't have a home somewhere else (e.g. possibly the sysctl module, others).
Any updates? Do you need more information?
Metadata Update from @bcotton: - Issue tagged with: ticket-vote, trademarks
I guess I'll break the voting ice.
+1 from me
+1 from me, too
+1
Request is approved (+6,0,-0).
Metadata Update from @bcotton: - Issue close_status updated to: approved - Issue status updated to: Closed (was: Open)
Login to comment on this ticket.