- automotive-sig - lists.centos.org

October meeting minutes & new meetings times proposed
by Jeffrey Osier-Mixon 06 Nov '21

06 Nov '21

The October meeting was held last Thursday. This link shows minutes as well as a link to the recording: https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Automotive/Meetings/2021-10 One of our goals for this SIG is to make the process more participatory to everyone so we can get many voices into the mix. While we are grateful for those who continue to show up and discuss things at meetings and on the mailing list, we also want to make it easier for those who haven't yet been able to participate, particularly as our meeting times have not been friendly to Asia. In addition, we held a poll to get some feedback on good meeting times - as expected, there is no single good time that suits the US, Europe and Asia. Going forward, I would like to propose the following meeting changes, in which each meeting will be held twice during the same week at alternating times: Office hours (informal) meeting: Tue Nov 2: 1600UTC (1200 EST, 1800 CEST) Tue Nov 2: 2300UTC (1900 EST, 0800 JST) Primary (formal) meeting: Tue Nov 16: 1600UTC (1200 EST, 1800 CEST) Tue Nov 16: 2300UTC (1900 EST, 0800 JST) and further alternating the day/time month by month to accommodate the poll responses: Office hours (informal) meeting: Wed Dec 1: 1600UTC (1200 EST, 1800 CEST) Wed Dec 1: 2300UTC (1900 EST, 0800 JST) Primary (formal) meeting: every 4 weeks starting Tue Nov 16 Wed Dec 15: 1600UTC (1200 EST, 1800 CEST) Wed Dec 15: 2300UTC (1900 EST, 0800 JST) According to the polls, I believe the majority of people can make it to at least one of these time slot. If you would like to participate but none of these works, please respond on this thread and we'll continue to iterate on it. thanks all Jeffrey "Jefro" Osier-Mixon | jefro(a)redhat.com Red Hat Office of the CTO | Sr. Principal Community Architect, Automotive

1 2

The automotive-SIG git repository
by Pierre-Yves Chibon 22 Oct '21

22 Oct '21

Good Morning Everyone, During the last SIG meeting we discussed where we want to host the code that the SIG is working on. At the SIG meeting today, we announced that the project has been created. It can be found at: https://gitlab.com/redhat/automotive/automotive-sig It contains osbuild-manifests allowing to build qcow2 images as well as raspberry pi 4 images. These images are based on CentOS-Stream 8 (9 being pretty high on our todo list) and use ostree. Documentation on how to manually build the images using osbuild can be found at: https://sigs.centos.org/automotive We are working on having non-ostree based images as they can be more convenient for experimentation. Finally, we have another team at Red Hat working on a CI pipeline which will trigger for every package update in CentOS-Stream and merge request to the automotive-sig project. More details on this should be coming soon :) Happy hacking! Pierre

1 0

Reminder: CentOS Auto SIG meeting tomorrow
by Jeffrey Osier-Mixon 19 Oct '21

19 Oct '21

Hi folks - just a quick reminder of tomorrow's meeting at 1500UTC (11am EDT, 5pm CEST). As usual, let me know if you'd like to be added to the calendar invitation, or if you have any agenda items to add. Tomorrow we will be going over a few business items before going into general discussion: - build & test infrastructure update - future meeting schedule (thanks to those who responded to the poll) - request for help to develop contribution guidelines Hope to see you all there Jeffrey "Jefro" Osier-Mixon | jefro(a)redhat.com Red Hat Office of the CTO | Sr. Principal Community Architect, Automotive

2 3

SIG meeting times - how should we meet?
by Jeffrey Osier-Mixon 12 Oct '21

12 Oct '21

Hi folks - I have had a few requests to change the monthly meeting time for the formal Automotive SIG meeting, and I also have a conflict with it going forward. The existing time (fourth Thursday, 1500 UTC) does not work for everyone who wants to attend. I put together a poll with a few times: https://doodle.com/poll/3th93r4p9wc8fg9r?utm_source=poll&utm_medium=link If any of these work for you, or especially if none of them work for you, please respond on this thread so we can nail down a good time. thanks all Jeffrey "Jefro" Osier-Mixon | jefro(a)redhat.com Red Hat Office of the CTO | Sr. Principal Community Architect, Automotive

1 1

Re: [Centos-automotive-sig] Proposition for Google Calendar Invite
by Andrew Tomich 01 Oct '21

01 Oct '21

Hi all, Just my 2 bits: I think a Google Calendar invite is a great idea. I don't want to miss meetings and sometimes the announcements get buried under a bunch of other emails. Regards, Andrew Tomich

2 1

CentOS Automotive SIG - General chat reminder
by Jeffrey Osier-Mixon 30 Sep '21

30 Sep '21

Hi all, just a reminder that we will host our first unofficial general chat & office hours tomorrow, October 1, at 1500UTC (8am PDT, 11am EDT, 5pm CEST) https://bluejeans.com/870492784 As we discussed in the last call, this meeting has no set agenda and is totally optional. I expect that we will discuss the current state of the infrastructure as well as the incoming contribution by Red Hat of an initial framework so we can start discussions on what to include. I'd also like to start a discussion on good meeting times - there is no perfect time for everyone, but I'd like as much feedback as possible for future scheduling. So whether you have anything to share or not, please feel free to stop in! Finally - if you haven't already done so (and if you are interested), please make sure to subscribe to the automotive SIG mailing list for all future announcements. Also, please let me know if you would like to be added to a Google calendar invite for future meetings - and yes we are looking for a more universal option. best regards, Jeffrey "Jefro" Osier-Mixon | jefro(a)redhat.com Red Hat Office of the CTO | Sr. Principal Community Architect, Automotive

1 0

Where should we host our code?
by Leigh Griffin 28 Sep '21

28 Sep '21

Hey everyone, This came up on the call yesterday to open a discussion about where we should host our code and I'd like to open it up here for transparency on the path forward. We have a lot of options in this sphere and all are Git based. Historically, CentOS SIGs had their code hosted at https://git.centos.org/. That's wired up to the CentOS Account system so users can login seamlessly. Some SIGs have opted to host on Github as well and use their own Github profile (which is not connected to their CentOS account). Currently, CentOS Stream is being built in the open at gitlab.com/redhat/centos-stream where community contributors can create a Gitlab account and interact with CentOS Stream. Gitlab is not currently wired into the CentOS Account system and the team is working to get that integration on the gitlab.com/CentOS project (which is currently dormant). The suggestion put forward by Pierre-Yves Chibon, who is leading the effort within Red Hat on creating the services and infrastructure for the SIG, is to base ourselves on Gitlab. We can create a gitlab.com/redhat/automotive-sig project and mirror it at gitlab.com/centos/automotive-sig so we can show people where we will work once we've resolved the authentication question. The drawback is the need to use a gitlab.com account, which, in time, we can merge into the CentOS Account when the integration is completed. The key benefit of having us base our code on Gitlab is the closeness to Stream from a codebase perspective and the potential to use similar tools and approaches as their development workflow. While no formal decision on where the overall CentOS SIGs will host their code in the future has been made, the presence of Stream on Gitlab is potentially future proofing us against a migration. Does the community have a strong preference for where we should base our repos? I'm going to suggest we leave this topic percolate for a week to have some dialog on the best path forward and then create our presence on the source forge of choice. Thanks, Leigh -- Leigh Griffin Senior Engineering Manager Red Hat Waterford <https://www.redhat.com/> Communications House Cork Road, Waterford City lgriffin(a)redhat.com M: +353877545162 IM: lgriffin @redhatjobs <https://twitter.com/redhatjobs> redhatjobs <https://www.facebook.com/redhatjobs> @redhatjobs <https://instagram.com/redhatjobs> <https://red.ht/sig>

5 6

Friday CentOS Automotive office hours
by Jeffrey Osier-Mixon 27 Sep '21

27 Sep '21

Hi all - I'd like to propose an informal office hours chat on Friday at 11am EDT, 5pm CEST. This will be an open discussion about automotive software and the ongoing efforts within the SIG. I'd also like to discuss meeting schedules going forward so we can make sure to maximize participation. Hope to see you there. Friday October 1 1500 UTC / 11am EDT / 5pm CEST https://bluejeans.com/870492784 Going forward, I would like to maintain these meetings on a SIG calendar, and I'm exploring how to do that most effectively. Thanks for your patience. Jeffrey "Jefro" Osier-Mixon | jefro(a)redhat.com Red Hat Office of the CTO | Sr. Principal Community Architect, Automotive

1 0

Automotive package repository?
by Leonardo Rossetti 23 Sep '21

23 Sep '21

Hello, I would like to hear about the community opinion on this. The pipeline delivery team currently installs a number of packages in some of their pipeline tasks, this package list (package + package version) is stored in a file and that file gets updated when a new version of a listed package is around in Koji. The problem is that Koji is being used to check for new package versions but that doesn't mean a compose was run which can lead to a situation where mirrors do not have that "latest" package version that was built on koji (a compose is run weekly). To illustrate things in a practical way: - A new version (1.34.0) of NetworkManager was built in koji: https://koji.mbox.centos.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=1433; - The package is not available in centos mirrors (yet): http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8-stream/BaseOS/aarch64/os/Packages/ ; - The package gets updated in this file: https://gitlab.com/redhat/edge/ci-cd/manifests/-/blob/update-package-Networ… ; - The pipeline job fails because yum can't find that version of the package in the BaseOS repository. I know that we can download those RPMs directly from Koji but I was wondering if this is where the SIG could/should step in and make the user experience a bit better by providing a single source of truth, be it a repository or some tooling, to retrieve package info and show where they stand. Any thoughts on this? Thanks! -- Leonardo Rossetti Red Hat <https://www.redhat.com> lrossett(a)redhat.com <https://www.redhat.com>

1 0

Video from Sept 16 meeting
by Jeffrey Osier-Mixon 17 Sep '21

17 Sep '21

Hi all - here is a link to the video recording from yesterday's call https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0pUDb_BWSQ I will be putting together a poll to make sure the meeting time works for most people going forward, and will also put together an Office Hours in about 2 weeks. hope to see you there! Jeffrey "Jefro" Osier-Mixon | jefro(a)redhat.com Red Hat Office of the CTO | Sr. Principal Community Architect, Automotive

1 0

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

automotive-sig