devel

devel@lists.centos.org

8 participants
4607 discussions

Cloud SIG meetup, OpenStack Summit Tokyo
by Rich Bowen 23 Sep '15

23 Sep '15

Because we were unable to get one of the official BoF rooms at OpenStack Summit, in Tokyo, the Ceph Community Meetup has graciously offered us the use of their room during the lunch our on Wednesday. That's 12:45 - 14:00, Wednesday, October 28th, in the Sakura Tower. Exact room name/number to come very soon. -- Rich Bowen - rbowen(a)redhat.com OpenStack Community Liaison http://rdoproject.org/

1 0

[Proposal] Converge EPEL and CBS
by Haïkel 23 Sep '15

23 Sep '15

Hi, Since the CentOS acquihire, there was a lot of discussion about EPEL's future. Since the FOSDEM meetup between Fedora/CentOS folks, there was little progress on that topic After a discussion with a Smooge, I decided to come with a proposal, knowing that 1. Fedora wants to keep EPEL within it umbrella 2. That CentOS SIGs are in practice rebuilding a lot of EPEL packages (or retag them for other SIGs) leading to poor maintenance as they don't follow EPEL tickets for all their dependencies. 3. EPEL is not part CentOS plans, and as soon as SIGs will progress, *may* turn the former irrelevant 4. Some EPEL packages are poorly maintained especially on older EL releases and/or orphaned We've reached the point where both EPEL/CBS would greatly benefit to join hands. So I suggest that we consider the following: * EPEL will still use Fedora dist-git * EPEL builds should be done in CBS to make it easier for SIGs to consume it. * EPEL will use CentOS repositories instead of mirroring RHEL repositories * Bridging Fedora/CentOS accounting system (CentOS is migrating to FAS) <== we need to see the feasibility of this but that would be optimal, that would increase the permeability between our two contributors pools which is something, we all want to encourage. * Create a EPEL provenpackager group under CentOS core SIG supervision, allowing them to appoint people to maintain EPEL packages. I suggest that we keep the EPEL name to acknowledge EPEL historical effort to provide quality additional packages for EL distros. Fedora contributors would still be able to contribute to EPEL, and CentOS contributors to make it up their standards. Would that work for you? Regards, H.

8 11

RDO OpenStack Liberty test day [Cloud SIG]
by Rich Bowen 22 Sep '15

22 Sep '15

Don't forget - we'll be doing a Liberty test day September 23rd and 24th. Details are here: http://beta.rdoproject.org/testday/rdo-test-day-liberty-01/ You can update that page, and the associated test scenarios page, at https://github.com/redhat-openstack/website Thanks, and "see" you tomorrow. -- Rich Bowen - rbowen(a)redhat.com OpenStack Community Liaison http://rdoproject.org/

1 0

[CBS] koji client issue with CBS with python >= 2.7.9
by Haïkel 22 Sep '15

22 Sep '15

Hi, I finally found a workaround to fix CBS issues when using python >= 2.7.9 (like Fedora 22 and above) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1231616 Though it's dirty, but it's no different from python 2.7.8 and older behavior. Starting python 2.7.9, python ssl standard module enable certificate verification by default, hence causing koji client to fail when interacting with CBS. What I do not get is why withe the same koki client I have no issues with Fedora Koji instance, and why it fails with CBS. People using F21 and older or CentOS, won't experience that issue. I suspect either a configuration or difference of server versions difference, so I'd like CBS admins to investigate that issue. Regards, H.

2 1

Repo for virtualization infrastructure
by George Dunlap 21 Sep '15

21 Sep '15

A user on centos-virt asked about openvswitch, noting that there were openvswitch packages for the cloud SIG, but that they could only be built with the rest of openstack. Sandro said that virt-ovirt also has "several packages tagged from the cloud SIG". We should probably identify a bunch of these common "infrastructure" packages and get them all in one repo where the various sigs can depend on them. So "openstack" would probably be one. Sandro, what others did you have? Any other suggestions for packages, and a place to put them? virt-common would make some sense; or cloud-common perhaps. -George

2 1

Re: [CentOS-devel] CentOS-7 / powerpc BE bring up
by Akira Kuno 18 Sep '15

18 Sep '15

I vote Little Endian. Akira Kuno Manager Power Systems Sales Promotion Server Solutions IBM Systems IBM Japan

3 3

Re: [CentOS-devel] CentOS 7 on power64 status
by sauvignon2015＠yahoo.co.jp 18 Sep '15

18 Sep '15

I vote for little Endian. I want same Endian as x86.

1 0

CentOS/Fedora Atomic Test Day 09/22
by Dusty Mabe 17 Sep '15

17 Sep '15

Hey all, Sorry for the wide distribution.. We'd like to promote the joint test day we are doing next week for Atomic. Please see Jason's blog post for more details and join us on the test day: http://www.projectatomic.io/blog/2015/09/combined-fedora-centos-atomic-test… - Dusty

1 0

CentOS SCLo SIG sync-up meeting on #centos-devel (2015-09-16)
by Honza Horak 16 Sep '15

16 Sep '15

SCLo SIG 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 = * are we ready to remove the temp pkgs from CBS? * dist-git repos creation -- anything missing? * docker images on the hub based on SCLo collections Honza

1 1

Re: [CentOS-devel] CentOS-7 / powerpc BE bring up
by Takashi Ohsawa 15 Sep '15

15 Sep '15

>Perhaps we can get folks who have shown interest in having Power on CentOS to post their preferred architecture here? My vote is LE architecture. Currently , I am using CentOS on IA. My application porting is easy because LE is same as IA's endian. -- -- Takashi Ohsawa --

4 3

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

devel