#1390 F22 System Wide Change: RpmOstree - Server side composes and atomic upgrades - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/RpmOstree
Closed None Opened 4 years ago by jreznik.

For the 2015-01-21 meeting as the Change Proposal was announced on devel-announce list on 2015-01-13.

The rpm-ostree tool provides a new way to deploy and manage RPM-based operating systems. Instead of performing a package-by-package install and upgrade on each client machine, the tooling supports "composing" sets of packages on a server side, and then clients can perform atomic upgrades as a tree.

The system by default preserves the previously booted deployment, providing an "A/B partition" type feel, allowing quick system rollbacks for the entire OS content (kernel and userspace).

This is a dependency of the Changes/Atomic_Cloud_Image.


AGREED: defer until we get further details on what is actually being proposed (7+, 0-)

I don't know that anyone asked questions on list...

Walters: can you join the meeting tomorrow at 18UTC to answer questions?

Yes, I wil; be available. Though I would generally prefer email discussion.

We discussed this in todays meeting, but decided to defer to next week.

This ticket will be discussed in the FESCo meeting on Wednesday at 18:00UTC in #fedora-meeting on irc.freenode.net.

(Has anything changed in the last 2/3 weeks?)

From today’s FESCo meeting: Defer tickets 1390, 1396, 1397 until we get more specifics, remove meeting keyword until then (+6)

Can you please elaborate exactly what specifics are desired here?

And can someone from FESCo please email change owners when their status is discussed?

Replying to [comment:8 walters]:

Can you please elaborate exactly what specifics are desired here?

Originally there were various questions about at least some of the three changes, e.g. how they differ from what has already happened from F21. Two (three?) weeks ago it seemed that you are planning to merge or significantly reword the Change pages, and at that time we have deferred detailed discussion to instead discuss the merged version. If there will not be a merged version, let’s discuss the three individually; various questions are in FESCo meeting logs, unfortunately I can’t right now give a short summary.

And can someone from FESCo please email change owners when their status is discussed?
You are Cc:ed on this ticket, so you should be receiving email about it; in particular comment:6 was supposed to notify you. Does this not work?

On 2015-02-11, all 3 tickets were deferred for "more specifics", with those specifics not mentioned in the meeting.

2015-01-28: Dennis Gilmore suggesting that the changes were done in F21, and I basically disagree given we didn't get the real bare metal (GRUB2) changes in that release. I answered that concern in that meeting. Then further:

19:16:32 <dgilmore> the rpm content is a bunch of todo's
19:16:42 <nirik> dgilmore: so what would you like to see there? documentation? or ?
19:16:48 <dgilmore> maybe its just lacking the needed detail
19:20:21 <walters> dgilmore, yeah, i'll fill it in more

I did a bit more editing after that, but had travel in between. I'd like a high bandwidth discussion with what exactly needs clarification.

Going back to the 2015-01-21 meeting:
19:30:42 <mitr> It still is unclear to me after the mailing list threads whether the /var packaging changes are required or optional, and without more detail or a proposed guideline it is difficult to evaluate impact.

Was my reply to jzeleny not sufficient?

19:32:36 <dgilmore> since we already make an atomic tree and install it into the atomic cloud image that piece is not a change
19:34:43 <dgilmore> I think here Colin needs to be much clearer about what this change actually is

Basically, in my opinion, the update system and Fedora's use of it for a specific product (AtomicHost = minimal Docker server) are distinct things. For example, it's also possible to use rpm-ostree to replicate workstations. Conceptually then, they're distinct Change(s).

What I want from FESCo is to either agree with the above or disagree.

Ideally specific concrete suggestions for improvements would be really nice!

FESCo, please review this and ask concrete questions.

Colin, if you could take the replies you have give in various places and consolidate them either in this ticket (e.g. I have no idea what your reply to jzeleny is) and/or in the Change page itself, that would be very helpful.

From today's FESCO meeting: Approve RpmOstree change (+1: 7, -1: 0, 0: 1)

Login to comment on this ticket.

Metadata