Hi again folks,
I promised to provide updates as soon as we get new services wired up.
I have another one for us.
You can now visit https://composes.stream.centos.org/
This is the place where you'll find point-in-time test instances of
yum repos, install media, cloud images (coming soon), and other
artifacts. For right now we are generating composes for infrastructure
purposes and to test out our tooling, but there are a couple of
composes that do result in a working installer.
Some notes:
- RPMs and images are published unsigned in the Test composes right
now. We'll be back with an update about signing when that comes online
- For now composes are generated Ad-hoc, there is not an automatic
schedule yet but that's something that we're working on now that we
have the infrastructure ready
- We'll soon be including documentation on the different compose types
and what they mean, for now we are only generating 'Test' composes.
They can be found here: https://composes.stream.centos.org/test
- Because things are very early, we are not currently shipping .repo
files, we recommend doing fresh installs for testing purposes. Updates
from one compose to the next may work but are not tested
- Test composes will be cleaned up more frequently than the other
upcoming compose types, you can always find a fresh one by using the
latest-CentOS-Stream symlink in the test directory
Happy testing!
--Brian
On 29. 04. 21 17:13, Michal Schorm wrote:
> (4)
> Section 1
> Text: "It's also great to have it in Fedora Linux first as well."
>
> AFAIK, the OS you are mentioning is named "Fedora" or you can use
> "Fedora Operating System" (to distinguish from the Fedora Project that
> has a broader portfolio than just the OS). I think the "Fedora Linux"
> is not correct.
> Correct me if I'm wrong
I am afraid that you actually are.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Fedora_Linux_in_os-release
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
Background story : for some SIGs building for/against 8-stream (and
hopefully soon for/against 9-stream), we'd like to upgrade
cbs.centos.org to koji 1.23 and all components on CentOS 8-stream.
The current setup is based on koji 1.19 on top of CentOS 7 nodes.
While we have tested that it works fine for all builds and signing with
8-straem (tracking ticket https://pagure.io/centos-infra/issue/233) we
have though a "small" issue that we'd like to announce first here :
8-stream doesn't exist for the following architectures : ppc64 (Big
Endian, while ppc64le - Little Endian - exists) and armhfp.
I had a quick survey on what is being built/maintained (and so pushed
out to mirror CDN) and ppc64/armhfp aren't even used. So it seems that
removing ppc64/armhfp support from CBS is the way to go and it wouldn't
hurt any SIG.
The only SIG that actually builds and ships packages to external mirror
is the Infra SIG (so "us"), but we're building pkgs just because we had
to maintain that arch ourselves, meaning that if we remove it from cbs,
we don't have to maintain infra for ppc64 anymore (for SIG, as pkgs from
CentOS 7 distro itself will continue to be built and shipped, but they
aren't built on cbs anyway)
Opinions ? thoughts ?
Depending on feedback (or lack of in this case), I'll announce the
maintenance window about cbs.centos.org migration to 8-stream in the
next days (normally planned for next week but waiting for some feedback)
Kind Regards,
--
Fabian Arrotin
The CentOS Project | https://www.centos.org
gpg key: 17F3B7A1 | twitter: @arrfab
** Please do read the message before responding with your nominations.
We have a process, and if you don’t follow the process, it makes
everything harder for everyone. **
** The process is to email centos-board-private(a)centos.org. Read on for
more details. **
At the April Board of Directors meeting, we discussed the annual process
of re-appointing the Board of Directors, as defined in our Governance
documents. At that time, two directors indicated that they wished to
step down, to focus on other things in their life and open the seats to
new contributors.
(Historical note: The last time a director resigned, the Board simply
appointed replacements with no public process. We believe that greater
transparency is needed in this new chapter of our existence as a
project, and are committed to making that happen.)
With two resignations, we have 8 Board seats filled. Our governance
definition as it currently stands indicates 8 to 11 seats[1], so we’re
still covered. However, we have decided to continue to seat 10 directors
as part of the new Board.
To this end, we come to you, the CentOS Community, for nominations for
who should fill those seats. We ask that you send nominations to
centos-board-private(a)centos.org and NOT to this list. There are several
reasons for this:
1) Our governance indicates that the Board selects the next Board. We do
not have any defined notion of project “membership” or a voting class of
any kind, other than the Board itself. We do not wish to give any false
impression that a public vote will be held on this list.
2) We do not wish for this to devolve into a bikeshed over proposed names.
3) We do not wish for individuals named to assume that they have any
particular advantage over other nominees, nor do we wish for anyone to
be shamed, embarrassed, or disappointed, if they are named and then not
seated on the Board.
The Board will collect those nominations, consider them at an upcoming
meeting, and select the next Board at that time.
We ask, if you wish to nominate someone, to consider the list of
director requirements/recommendations listed at
https://www.centos.org/about/governance/director-requirements/
Thank you for your participation in this important moment in our
project’s history.
Rich, for the CentOS Board of Directors
[1] https://www.centos.org/about/governance/
Hello!
With the help of Neal, I've put together a mock-centos-sig-configs
project to hold mock configs for CentOS SIGs:
https://pagure.io/centos-sig-hyperscale/mock-centos-sig-configs
This should make it easier to build packages against a given SIG for
testing and development using mock. The project currently contains
configs for the Hyperscale SIG, but other SIGs are obviously welcome --
just file an issue or (even better) send a PR on Pagure.
mock-centos-sig-configs is already packaged in Fedora, and should
become available in EPEL in a week or so:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/mock-centos-sig-configs
Cheers
Davide
You may have seen, a few days ago, that the Fedora project announced[1]
a new Code of Conduct for their community.
What you may not have known is that the CentOS project was involved in
the crafting of that Code, so that we could also use it here.
Yeah, I know, this is something we should have done a long time ago.
But, you know what they say about the best time to plant a tree. (The
best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago. The second best time is today.)
As we continue to work to make all aspects of the CentOS Project more
open and transparent, it is important that we create an open, welcoming
community where all people, from all backgrounds, feel safe in their
participation. This allows for a broader contributor pool, with more
ideas and more community ownership of the resulting outcomes.
And it's just the right thing to do.
It is our intent to take the text of the Fedora CoC, and replace
'Fedora' with 'CentOS' everywhere, and propose it here. There will, of
course, be other small changes to the text (Board vs Council, and so on)
but not to the details of the Code itself, and how we intend to address
reports. We're holding off on those edits so that our version doesn't
drift from theirs, during their 2 week comment period. (Ends April 26th.)
The document is derived from the Contributor Covenant, along with work
that has been ongoing in the Fedora project for some time. Note also
that the Contributor Covenant is also the source material for the CoC
used by the Linux kernel project.[2]
To that end, we encourage you to engage in the discussion around the
Fedora CoC, because any changes made there will influence what we end up
with here. And we also encourage discussion on centos-devel[3], for
anything that you feel is specific to our community.
--Rich, on behalf of the CentOS Board of Directors
[1]
https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/policy-proposal-new-code-of-conduct/
[2]
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?…
[3] https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
Hello,
I recently packaged a utility in Fedora 34[1] that enterprise cloud users
might find helpful so I'd like to package it for CentOS 8 Stream and
CentOS 9 Stream as well.
I've been following the CentOS Stream Contributing wiki page[2] to
figure out how to get started with this. However, it seems like all of
these instructions are only relevant if the package that someone would
want to contribute to already has its own repo in the dist-git.
I've made some good progress on the CentOS 8 Stream package already, and
I'm used to the Fedora process where this is about the time that I'd post
it for review soon as part of the authorization process for getting a new
repo in the dist-git.
Is there a CentOS equivalent to the Fedora package review process for
getting a repo created?
Thank you,
Connor
[1] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-sevctl
[2] https://wiki.centos.org/Contribute/CentOSStream
Hi,
while verifying https://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/ovirt-release/+/114299/
noticed we are missing Advanced Virtualization builds for aarch64 and
ppc64le on CentOS Stream.
I guess it's similar to what happened with ovirt 4.4 and tracked here:
https://pagure.io/centos-infra/issue/254
Eduardo can you follow up on this and ensure we have ppc64le and aarch64
packages there?
--
Sandro Bonazzola
MANAGER, SOFTWARE ENGINEERING, EMEA R&D RHV
Red Hat EMEA <https://www.redhat.com/>
sbonazzo(a)redhat.com
<https://www.redhat.com/>
*Red Hat respects your work life balance. Therefore there is no need to
answer this email out of your office hours.*