April 2015 - devel - lists.centos.org

Re: [CentOS-devel] No Storage SIG Meeting 6-March-2015 15:30 UTC (Moving it to next week)
by Justin Clift 18 Apr '15

18 Apr '15

On 18 Apr 2015, at 17:36, Doug Ledford <dledford(a)redhat.com> wrote: > On Sat, 2015-04-18 at 15:09 +0100, Justin Clift wrote: >> On 18 Apr 2015, at 10:39, Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche(a)sandisk.com> wrote: >>> On 03/11/15 18:01, Justin Clift wrote: >>>> On 10 Mar 2015, at 11:09, Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche(a)sandisk.com> wrote: >>>>> Hello, >>>>> >>>>> Sorry but I will not be able to attend this meeting because at that time I will be on a plane. But I have been thinking further about how to provide SCST RPMs for CentOS. How about using the approach documented on http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/BuildingKernelModules (weak updates) and taking the risk that the IB drivers may break if an update introduces an RDMA ABI change ? >>>> >>>> The "take a risk X might break" bit doesn't really sound suitable >>>> for the CentOS audience. >>>> >>>> That being said... how often does the RDMA ABI change? If it's >>>> once every X years, then it might be live-able (with sufficient >>>> catches/warning so users aren't affected). >>> >>> (back from traveling - sorry for the delay in replying) >>> >>> Hello Justin, >>> >>> So far I have only seen the RDMA ABI change between RHEL releases (e.g. from 7.0 to 7.1) but not yet due to a kernel update. Which of course is no guarantee that a change of the RDMA API will never happen in the future between kernel releases ... >> >> Hmmmm... in general RHEL has an attitude of "don't change ABI in >> updates", > > It's not an attitude, it's a hard requirement that requires managerial > approval for an exception to break it. > >> but RDMA may or may not have different assumptions. I >> have no idea. ;) > > It does. We exempt the kernel portion of the RDMA stack from any ABI > claims entirely. For user space, we make a best effort to preserve > backward binary compatibility, but not forward. Meaning if you compile > a user space app against 7.0, our 7.1 and later updates will all be > backward compatible to your compiled program. However, we add > extensions, so if you compile against 7.2 let's say, and use one of the > new extensions, then you program will not run on 7.0. However, keep in > mind that this is a best effort. On occasion, with managerial approval, > we break this too. The RDMA simply moves too fast to keep it static > through the life of a RHEL product. Thanks Doug. :) + Justin -- GlusterFS - http://www.gluster.org An open source, distributed file system scaling to several petabytes, and handling thousands of clients. My personal twitter: twitter.com/realjustinclift

1 0

Storage SIG Meeting 6-March-2015 15:30 UTC
by Lalatendu Mohanty 18 Apr '15

18 Apr '15

Greetings All! Time for another Storage SIG meeting [1] ( We are following a bi-weekly schedule) . But I forgot to announce it yesterday. Sorry for the inconvenience caused. Let me know if it is too late to announce the meeting (in that case we can cancel this meeting). We will be meeting in #centos-devel on Freenode. Agenda: #info Topic: Action items from previous meeting #info Topic: Status Updates #info Subtopic: GlusterFS #info Subtopic: OpenAFS #info Subtopic: Ceph #info Subtopic: SCST #info Open Floor Thanks, Lala

3 5

Getting started on contributing to CentOS
by Gow Tham 18 Apr '15

18 Apr '15

Hi, I have been using CentOS for quite a while now and would like to switch from the user to a contributor. kbsingh mentioned on the ilug mailing list that this was a good time to get acquainted with the community because of the influx of new users due to the Google Summer of Code event. Looking at the Summer of Code ideas page, (http://wiki.centos.org/GSoC/2015/Ideas ), the one about writing a Lightweight Cloud instance contextualisation tool seemed like a good place to start. How can I start with it ? -sg

2 2

CentOS Atomic: json consolidation
by Jason Brooks 16 Apr '15

16 Apr '15

At the Atomic SIG mtg last week, I mentioned consolidating our two json files that contain the centos atomic host definition into one json file. Here's a commit for that in my fork of the repo: https://github.com/jasonbrooks/sig-atomic-buildscripts/commit/2a0af4e5e3dfa… Any objections to carrying this change over to the main repo? Regards, Jason --- Jason Brooks Red Hat Open Source and Standards @jasonbrooks | @redhatopen http://community.redhat.com

2 1

Storage SIG Meeting 17-April-2015 15:30 UTC
by Lalatendu Mohanty 16 Apr '15

16 Apr '15

Greetings All! Time for a Storage SIG meeting. We will be meeting in #centos-devel on Freenode. Thanks, Lala

1 0

nss build failure - Just an FYI to folks who may be rebuilding.
by Jim Perrin 16 Apr '15

16 Apr '15

One of the tests in the nss build will fail, because paypal issued a new cert[1]. This will cause the package build to fail. [1] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1151037 -- Jim Perrin The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77

1 0

"CentOS.devel"
by Colin Walters 15 Apr '15

15 Apr '15

For a long time, Red Hat engineers have dropped public RPMs onto people.redhat.com. Now that CentOS is a more official part of the family, it seems like an obvious idea to me, but why not create a "centos7-devel" branch that is public work that is intended to go into the next upstream update? Several of the existing repos like virt7-testing and atomic7-testing could simply be folded into this repo. As well as these "hand built" RPMs: http://people.redhat.com/lnykryn/systemd/ http://people.redhat.com/~rjones/libguestfs-RHEL-7.1-preview/ And I'm sure others. (I wouldn't be surprised if this has come up before but I couldn't figure out any keywords that would find previous conversation on this topic from the archives)

11 16

Re: [CentOS-devel] Hosting CentOS bugs on RH bugzilla
by Marcin Dulak 15 Apr '15

15 Apr '15

Hi, i would like to add some more to the discussion started at http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2015-April/013163.html 1. On the plot attached to http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=8447 one can see that since the CentOS 7 release the number of unresolved issues on bugs.centos.org has increased, and the number is currently more than 50 unresolved issues per month. Many issues do not obtain any attention (nothing in the notes). This continues for several months, and is an unprecedented situation. For me it shows that the CentOS community has not enough resources to deal with the reported issues. From this point of view it would be better to have CentOS issues integrated into RHEL's bugzilla, but the decision should also take into account Red Hat's long time plans for CentOS, unknown to me. 2. A single example I would like to bring up is the fate of http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=8249 The reporter made a substantial effort to collect usability issues encountered during an installation of CentOS, got asked to report the issues at bugzilla what he did, and there this got (politely) closed https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197377 This seems to be his only bug at bugzilla.redhat.com. Maybe if CentOS was at bugzilla then CentOS developers could focus more on the "open-source" way of dealing with people's reports, which will counteract a bit Red Hat's enforcement of compliance with it's strategies. 3. One more point, and it has to do with the way Fedora/EPEL package updates are handled. When I update an RPM package fixing a bug for Fedora/EPEL the update almost never gets any reviews. The update is sitting for some fixed amount of time (2 weeks for EPEL) and after that I push it to stable (still without any review). I'll bring the famous case here what the result of such releases could potentially be: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1054350 (actually I don't know if the offending release was reviewed or not). Or another case which affected me: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1063493 Red Hat changed major version of software (mpich2 -> mpich3) which resulted in a couple months of empty running reviews (2 weeks each) at EPEL in order to fix all dependencies. I'm not familiar with the role CentOS could have in the process of preparation of new RHEL updates, but if there is anything that could be done to improve the RPM package update process, it should be considered as an important factor in case of merging CentOS issues to bugzilla. Best regards, Marcin

8 10

triggering external actions from koji builds
by Karanbir Singh 15 Apr '15

15 Apr '15

hi, I want to be able to trigger external actions when rpms are built successfully into some specific targets. How would I do this today ? My immediate requirement is to run jenkins jobs when a new rpm drops into a repo. Does koji have any support for this without the remote having to constantly poll every second ? if not, do we need to then just hit a specific url on the jenkins side as a 'notify' from the mash run when it sees new content ? regards, -- Karanbir Singh +44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc

3 5

Welcoming Brian to CentOS Engineering Team at Red Hat
by Karanbir Singh 14 Apr '15

14 Apr '15

hi Everyone, I would like to take this opportunity to welcome Brian Stinson to the CentOS Engineering Team at Red Hat, as a part of the Open Source and Standards group. In this team he will initially be focused on the central authentication services. As an extention he will also own the user interface and toolings around the UI to the CentOS Build Services and Source control. As a part of his additional portfolio, he's going to help Thomas Oulevey and Fabian Arrotin on various CBS, CI, QA and associated infrastructure management. Brian has been a key community contributor to the centpkg and the buildsystem efforts and more recently in the QA teams. He lives and works out of the Midwest USA ( Summer time offset: UTC -5:00 ). Brian is also helping the EPEL effort as a member of their Steering Committee and helping bridge the CentOS to EPEL stories. You can find him on #centos-devel on irc.freenode.net as bstinson and on twitter as @bstinsonmhk Welcome aboard Brian! -- Karanbir Singh +44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc

4 3

Switching to centralized authentication for CBS Infrastructure (aka FAS vs IPA)
by Brian Stinson 14 Apr '15

14 Apr '15

Hi All, I wanted to revive this old thread so we can get moving with our Central Auth solution. I've been playing for the past few days with both FAS and IPA and I'd like to present my findings so far. Here are our requirements: - Generate and deliver x509 client certificates (this acts as a 'passport') for all CBS services - Self-Service account requests - Self-Service group management (e.g. SIG admins can easily add members to the SIG) - Easily auth for CBS services (koji, git, lookaside, etc.) FreeIPA ============= FreeIPA's advantages come from being included in the distro by default, by having a stable upstream, and by being a robust full-fledged ID/Security management system that includes setting up a CA in it's deployment process. As to our requirements: - FreeIPA's CA can be modified to generate and sign client certificates, but: - We would need to write/maintain our own storage and delivery tools - We would maintain our cert generation tools until client certs are supported upstream. (There is not a clear upgrade path for this, and would require us to roll our CA and redo our delivery tools) - We would need to develop or maintain our own 3rd-party Self-Service account request system (pwm[1] is the frontrunner). - There are built-in tools that can manage groups (this would be separate from the account request system) - LDAP is near universal, and FreeIPA speaks it fluently (for those tools that need more information than what is in a client certificate) Since our requirements do not yet include the need for machine accounts, we may not be able to take advantage of all of the features of a Security Management System. In the future, we may find ourselves using more applications from Fedora which are not widely tested against IPA. FAS ============= FAS's advantages come from being developed with some of our current tools in mind. The established workflow: "Request Account, Generate Cert, Request Group Membership, Auth with user cert" is well tested with this tool in production, and we would be able to rely on (and contribute to) testing in deployments similar to ours. As to our requirements: - FAS manages the generation, signing, and delivery of the client certificate - Self-Service account requests are built in - Self-Service group membership (and invitations) are built in - Most tools already talk to FAS if they need it. Gitblit will need a little custom work (likely a plugin) to pull user and group membership information FAS is developed primarily for Fedora and would require some debranding and other tweaks to make it "ours". It would also require a bit more 'sysadmin' type work on the backend. Conclusions ============ This email is already getting long, so I won't get too farther in the weeds, though I'm happy to discuss them in this thread. In conclusion, I would like to propose that we select FAS as our Central Authentication solution. FAS seems to meet all of our SIG-facing requirements without requiring many 3rd party (or custom) tools, and the work required to get productive looks to be largely polish and packaging. Thoughts/Questions? Brian -- Brian Stinson brian(a)bstinson.com | IRC: bstinson | Bitbucket/Twitter: bstinsonmhk [1]: https://code.google.com/p/pwm/

2 2

compiling on EL 7.x, using -fsanitize=xxx
by Fred Smith 13 Apr '15

13 Apr '15

Hi all! Using Centos-7, I'm trying to build a C-language app using -fsanitize=address, or -fsanitize=thread. If I compile (and link) with -fsanitize=address when it tries to link it complains of missing libasan.so.x.x.x. Similarly compiling with -fsanitize=thread, it complains of a missing libtsan.so.x.x.x. I can't figure out where one is supposed to find those libraries. they don't appear to be part of the GCC packages, and doing yum whatprovides */libasan.so or yum whatprovides */libtsan.so turns up nothing. Clues appreciated, thanks in advance! Fred -- ---- Fred Smith -- fredex(a)fcshome.stoneham.ma.us ----------------------------- The Lord is like a strong tower. Those who do what is right can run to him for safety. --------------------------- Proverbs 18:10 (niv) -----------------------------

2 2

CBS/Infra Meeting 13-Apr-2015 14:00 UTC
by Brian Stinson 13 Apr '15

13 Apr '15

Hi All! It's time for another meeting to discuss the Community Build System. We will be meeting in #centos-devel on Freenode. Here's our Agenda: #info Topic: Quick Updates #info Topic: Koji Project Tags and Git Branches #info Topic: Open Floor See you there! Brian -- Brian Stinson brian(a)bstinson.com | IRC: bstinson | Bitbucket/Twitter: bstinsonmhk

1 0

Hosting CentOS bugs on RH bugzilla
by Lokesh Mandvekar 12 Apr '15

12 Apr '15

Given that we now have a lot of co-operation amongst CentOS-RHEL-Fedora, I was hoping we could host CentOS bugs on RH's bugzilla instance itself under a CentOS product, just like how we have Fedora and RHEL products. My guess is this should make life easier for people who file/deal with bugs related to all 3 distros. Considering docker as an example, when people complain about docker bugs they notice on CentOS7, I'm not sure whether to ask them to file bugs on bugs.c.o or bugzilla.rh.c, as that bug is actually something from RHEL. My guess is their first choice is to file bugs on bugs.c.o. There's also the virt SIG 'docker' and 'docker-master' variants and these are not pulled from RHEL. For bugs related to these, I'll need to ask users to file bugs on bugs.c.o and if this affects fedora/rhel as well, there would be separate bugs on RH's bugzilla about this. I feel it'd be much more convenient for me (and possibly others) to keep track of bugs and reference them if they're all hosted in a single place. Comments? * This issue has been apparently raised in the past as per conversations with Evolution on #centos-devel but it's kinda hard to find out recorded history about it. If anyone could send logs about why this was rejected or whatever, it'd be great. -- Lokesh Freenode, OFTC: lsm5 GPG: 0xC7C3A0DD

5 8

No Storage SIG meeting today
by Lalatendu Mohanty 10 Apr '15

10 Apr '15

Looks like we have not made much progress on the action items. Hence moving the meeting to next week. Thanks, Lala #lalatenduM on Freenode

1 0

including 3rd party repo release RPMs in Extras
by Carl George 10 Apr '15

10 Apr '15

Howdy, My name is Carl, and I'm a developer for the IUS Community repository. CentOS users have easy access to the EPEL repo because the epel-release RPM is in the CentOS Extras repository. Obviously CentOS and EPEL have a special relationship, since they are both sponsored by Red Hat. A coworker suggested to me that it would be nice if the ius-release RPM could be included in Extras as well. I brought the idea up in IRC, and Karanbir suggested I draft up a specification that any third party repository can follow to be considered for inclusion. Here is what I have so far. https://gist.github.com/cgtx/b854281462a18007f509 If this looks familiar, it's because I used the IUS SafeRepo Initiative as a starting point. Please share your feedback and ideas. Carl George Rackspace RPM Development

8 17

etcd fails to start in latest CentOS Atomic images
by Lalatendu Mohanty 10 Apr '15

10 Apr '15

I was trying to use/test the latest CentOS Atomic images [1] [2] and got in to this issue i.e. "systemctl start etcd " is failing. =============================== -bash-4.2# systemctl start etcd -bash-4.2# systemctl status etcd etcd.service - Etcd Server Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/etcd.service; disabled) Active: failed (Result: exit-code) since Fri 2015-04-10 05:26:54 UTC; 6s ago Process: 1724 ExecStart=/usr/bin/etcd (code=exited, status=200/CHDIR) Main PID: 1724 (code=exited, status=200/CHDIR) Apr 10 05:26:54 myhost.localdomain systemd[1]: Started Etcd Server. Apr 10 05:26:54 myhost.localdomain systemd[1724]: Failed at step CHDIR spawning /usr/bin/etcd: No such file or directory Apr 10 05:26:54 myhost.localdomain systemd[1]: etcd.service: main process exited, code=exited, status=200/CHDIR Apr 10 05:26:54 myhost.localdomain systemd[1]: Unit etcd.service entered failed state. ================================ I suspect there is something wrong with systemd unit file of etcd. The service file looks like below as of now. I think "WorkingDirectory=/var/lib/etcd/`$hostname`.etcd" should have only 'hostname' not '$hostname'. -bash-4.2# cat /usr/lib/systemd/system/etcd.service [Unit] Description=Etcd Server After=network.target [Service] Type=simple # etc logs to the journal directly, suppress double logging StandardOutput=null WorkingDirectory=/var/lib/etcd/`$hostname`.etcd User=etcd ExecStart=/usr/bin/etcd [Install] WantedBy=multi-user.target [1] CentOS-7-x86_64-AtomicHost-20150228_01.qcow2 [2] http://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Atomic/Download Thanks, Lala #lalatenduM on Freenode

1 0

Atomic SIG Meeting Minutes & Meeting Reminder (Thursday 16:00 UTC)
by Joe Brockmeier 07 Apr '15

07 Apr '15

Next meeting is Thursday 9 April at 16:00 UTC. ========================= #centos-devel: Atomic SIG ========================= Meeting started by jzb at 16:03:35 UTC. The full logs are available at http://centos.org/minutes/2015/april/centos-devel.2015-04-02-16.03.log.html . Meeting summary --------------- * LINK: http://centos.org/minutes/2015/march/centos-devel.2015-03-19-16.00.html (jzb, 16:04:15) * signing (jzb, 16:04:23) * ACTION: imcleod take lead on getting signing ready for imminent "stable" release (jzb, 16:06:00) * document release checklist (jzb, 16:06:36) * LINK: http://wiki.centos.org/Atomic/ReleaseManagement (jzb, 16:07:49) * LINK: http://wiki.centos.org/Atomic/ReleaseManagement (jzb, 16:07:56) * LINK: http://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Atomic has a bunch of stuff under there, maybe this can also live there ? (kbsingh, 16:08:51) * LINK: http://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Atomic/Download as an example (kbsingh, 16:09:00) * LINK: http://wiki.centos.org/Atomic/WeeklyMeeting (kbsingh, 16:09:23) * ACTION: jzb move Release Management page after meeting (jzb, 16:10:29) * release scheme for image kickstarts and Dockerfiles (jzb, 16:11:01) * ACTION: imcleod Establish ongoing release process for non-RPM artifacts, ideally into g.c.o (jzb, 16:15:47) * get final dates/info on two and four-week update plans. (jzb, 16:17:11) * ACTION: jzb set up meeting to align 4-week cycle. (jzb, 16:20:19) * atomic info in /etc/os-release (jzb, 16:20:44) * LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1200122 (walters, 16:29:48) * ACTION: lalatenduM set up discussion with kbsingh and langdon about os-release, report back to atomic-devel (jzb, 16:32:39) * open floor (jzb, 16:32:49) Meeting ended at 16:36:47 UTC. Action Items ------------ * imcleod take lead on getting signing ready for imminent "stable" release * jzb move Release Management page after meeting * imcleod Establish ongoing release process for non-RPM artifacts, ideally into g.c.o * jzb set up meeting to align 4-week cycle. * lalatenduM set up discussion with kbsingh and langdon about os-release, report back to atomic-devel -- Joe Brockmeier | Principal Cloud & Storage Analyst jzb(a)redhat.com | http://community.redhat.com/ Twitter: @jzb | http://dissociatedpress.net/

1 0

Atomic release checklist
by Jason Brooks 07 Apr '15

07 Apr '15

As discussed in last week's meeting (http://centos.org/minutes/2015/march/centos-devel.2015-03-19-16.00.html) I've put a CentOS Atomic release checklist in the wiki at: http://wiki.centos.org/Atomic/ReleaseManagement Regards, Jason --- Jason Brooks Red Hat Open Source and Standards @jasonbrooks | @redhatopen http://community.redhat.com

4 5

enhancing /etc/*-release
by Karanbir Singh 06 Apr '15

06 Apr '15

hi, We have spent a lot of time working out how best to work the /etc/centos-release file in order to satisfy most use cases. We've had a lot of positive feedback on the three digit release numbering that went into the first CentOS-7 release. And in the coming months, as the rolling builds onramp we will start seeing movement around those. This will also help address some points learned from the community during the 7.0.1406 cycle. We have also decided to split the /etc/redhat-release link to /etc/centos-release and use that as a way to better indicate what codebase the running CentOS Linux instance was derived from. Examples of what these files will look like in say March 2015 ( if .1 is released upstream by then ): ------------------- /etc/centos-release: CentOS Linux release 7.1.1503 (Core) /etc/redhat-release Derived from Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7.1 (Source) ------------------- The /etc/os-release file remains unchaged to indicate CentOS-7 as being the distro being consumed. We will however, be adding ABRT specific content to the os-release file once we have bugs.centos.org setup to accept abrt requests - and we have the required patched rolled out into the distro. These additions will have no impact on numbering reported via tools that consume /etc/os-release. The /etc/centos-release file will then evolve with every monthly release, with the updated file being pushed into updates repo. This implies if someone was to install from the March rolling build, their /etc/centos-release will already have 7.1.1503 and anyone having a previously installed machine, doing a yum update would see the same file drop in. The net result is an impact for new people installing from rolling build media ( and instance media like live images, cloud images, containers etc ). One installed or running, there is no change to how CentOS Linux has been in the past. You just get regular updates, and any machine, regardless of how it was installed and when, updated to the same point in time will have identical content. -- Karanbir Singh, Project Lead, The CentOS Project +44-207-0999389 | http://www.centos.org/ | twitter.com/CentOS GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc

14 27

CentOS SCLo SIG sync-up meeting on #centos-devel (2015-04-08)
by Honza Horak 02 Apr '15

02 Apr '15

Unfortunately I'm not available this week on Wed, I'm sorry, so let's arrange the SCLo meeting the next week. Since we have DST in Europe already as well, let's change to 15:00 UTC, that should fit to out schedules the same as it did on non-DST. So, SCLo meeting will be at 15:00 UTC (11:00 EST, 17:00 Brno, 11:00 Boston, 0:00+1d Tokyo, 1:00+1d Brisbane) in #centos-devel on Freenode. = Topics = * sync-up on current status * propose some other topics:) Honza

3 4

Building Centos 7 Cloud images
by Andrei DRAGOMIR 02 Apr '15

02 Apr '15

Hi, I have a question related to the cloud images available here: http://cloud.centos.org/centos/7/images/ 1. How do I build an image ? I looked at the source repos on git.centos.org, the closest one seems to be the sig-cloud-instance/build-instance repository, but I cannot find centos 7 related kickstarts in there. (I am assuming that the images are being built in an automated fashion, using unattended installation) Thank you, Andrei Dragomir -- /A

2 1

Reg: Documentation Toolchain [GSOC]
by kunaal jain 02 Apr '15

02 Apr '15

Hi guys, I have submitted my proposal on google-melange. I have been active in discussion regarding this on centos-docs as well with Karsten. I have created a small demo tool chain, to have a clarity on how process will flow and how site can be generated on git commits and deploying to hosting platform. You can find the code as well as the live version at : https://github.com/kunaaljain/test-centos-docs Please have a look at the proposal and the sample code I have written and give suggestions on how I can improve the proposal. Please note that the sample code is written for testing purpose, the actual toolchain may not use the open source tools I am using in it. Regards, Kunal Jain

1 0

Reg: Documentation Toolchain [GSOC]
by kunaal jain 02 Apr '15

02 Apr '15

Hi guys, I have submitted my proposal on google-melange. I have been active in discussion regarding this on centos-docs as well with Karsten. I have created a small demo tool chain, to have a clarity on how process will flow and how site can be generated on git commits and deploying to hosting platform. You can find the code as well as the live version at : https://github.com/kunaaljain/test-centos-docs Please have a look at the proposal and the sample code I have written and give suggestions on how I can improve the proposal. Please note that the sample code is written for testing purpose, the actual toolchain may not use the open source tools I am using in it. Regards, Kunal Jain

1 0

Cloud SIG meeting minutes
by Rich Bowen 02 Apr '15

02 Apr '15

Notes from today's Cloud SIG Meeting. We were pleased to have NuxRo from the Apache CloudStack community in attendance, and a major topic of conversation was how CloudStack can get involved in what we're doing, benefit from the CI effort, and various other cloud-init related discussions. Thank you all for your time and participation. Minutes: http://centos.org/minutes/2015/april/centos-devel.2015-04-02-15.11.html Minutes (text): http://centos.org/minutes/2015/april/centos-devel.2015-04-02-15.11.txt Log: http://centos.org/minutes/2015/april/centos-devel.2015-04-02-15.11.log.html -- Rich Bowen - rbowen(a)redhat.com OpenStack Community Liaison http://rdoproject.org/

1 0

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

devel April 2015