devel

devel@lists.centos.org

18 participants
4604 discussions

Promoting contributor efforts
by Karanbir Singh 23 Apr '13

23 Apr '13

hi, Over the years, we have had a silent group of people, who have helped, promoted, contributed code, helped QA, helped in various other parallel efforts that all bring together the CentOS Ecosystem. Its time we did something to promote these people, make them visible and to give them credit for the work and efforts they have been putting in. After all, a large chunk of reward for open source efforts is recognition. To this end, I'd like to propose the CentOS VIP effort. A draft overview is posted here : http://wiki.centos.org/KaranbirSingh/VIP A key takeaway from this is that this group would in effect take over running most of the project activities, with the CentOS Core team now back tracking to running admin and project specific tasks ( eg. making sure the centos.org domain name is paid for and renewed! ). I am looking for comments on things to add / remove / change, as well as a couple of voulenteers to help run the infra around this effort. - KB -- Karanbir Singh +44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc

11 12

Promoting contributor efforts
by Jeffrey Johnson 17 Apr '13

17 Apr '13

Begin forwarded message: > From: Jeffrey Johnson <n3npq(a)me.com> > Subject: Re: [CentOS-devel] Promoting contributor efforts > Date: April 17, 2013 7:44:44 AM EDT > To: "The CentOS developers mailing list." <centos-devel(a)centos.org> > > > On Apr 17, 2013, at 7:22 AM, cernekj wrote: > >> >> On 17.4.2013, at 11:43, Karanbir Singh wrote: >> >>> On 04/16/2013 12:19 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote: >>>> To this end, I'd like to propose the CentOS VIP effort. A draft overview >>>> is posted here : http://wiki.centos.org/KaranbirSingh/VIP >>> >>> Secondly, how does everyone feel about the title... VIP is clearly not >>> the right term, Captains has been called cheesy, Ambassadors has been >>> called misleading, Advocates and Consul seem to be the front runners >>> here. Anyone fancy proposing another term ? or should we just vote on >>> Consul and Advocate and run with that. >> >> >> Hi, >> What about: >> - Masters >> - Chiefs >> - Leaders >> - Directors >> ? >> > > I'd even volunteer if my job title was actually > > mugwump > > 73 de Jeff

1 0

CentOS torrents
by John Reuning 13 Apr '13

13 Apr '13

I had a conversation on IRC regarding torrents and trackers for centos and the terasaur.org project. This is a note, so the group can get in touch with me. Thanks, -John

2 1

New drbd83 and drbd-kmod83 testing RPMS available
by Johnny Hughes 27 Mar '13

27 Mar '13

Please look at these drbd83 and drbd-kmod83 testing RPMS: http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=6341 The link to the actual RPMS are there, here it is as well: http://people.centos.org/hughesjr/drbd/5/ Please provide feedback to bug 6341 (first link above) and we can get these moved into the extras repo. Thanks, Johnny Hughes

1 0

initscripts-9.03.38-1.el6.centos.1.src.rpm missing?
by Nathaniel W. Turner 25 Mar '13

25 Mar '13

I see that the mirror currently has a binary initscripts-9.03.38-1.el6.centos.1.x86_64.rpm, but I don't see the corresponding initscripts-9.03.38-1.el6.centos.1.src.rpm at http://vault.centos.org/6.4/os/Source/SPackages/ --- am I looking in the wrong place? -- Nathaniel W. Turner http://houseofnate.net/

3 3

Missing packages in CentOS 6.4 x86_64
by John Newbigin 22 Mar '13

22 Mar '13

Hi, This may be by design or there may be a reason for it which I don't know. In the x86_64 repository for CentOS 6.4, the i686 version of these packages below are not up to date. This causes yum to complain about 'Protected multilib versions'. * iscsi-initiator-utils-6.2.0.873-2.el6 * iscsi-initiator-utils-devel-6.2.0.873-2 * control-center-filesystem-2.28.1-38 There may be others but these are the three I had to fix manually on my system. I just downloaded the i686 versions from the i386 repository which seem to work fine. John. -- John Newbigin | ITS Senior Analyst / Programmer Faculty of Information and Communication Technologies ITS | Swinburne University of Technology | Melbourne, Australia O: EN306 | T: +61 3 9214 8185 | M: +61 410 569 362 E: jnewbigin(a)swin.edu.au W: http://www.ict.swin.edu.au/staff/jnewbigin

2 1

an upstream cloud-init
by Karanbir Singh 15 Mar '13

15 Mar '13

Hi, http://ftp.redhat.com/redhat/linux/enterprise/6Server/en/RH-COMMON/ Seems to have come online recently ( thanks ghoms for pointing at it ). target seems to be cloud-init and its deps, and only its deps ( they are conveniently marked with a .1 upgrade from corrosponding packages in EPEL ). But the name is interesting, What is is going to show up there ? and what sort of machine roles is the corrosponding repo being exposed to ? I've build the rpms to : https://nazar.karan.org/results/misc/cloud-init/20130315000927/ so feel free to play for now. Can anyone shed any light on the questions ? So we can then make a decision and see howto rope these into the distro repos in the best manner. Also, I suspect epel will need to either do something about these deps ( and they have an older 0.6 based cloud-init there ) - KB -- Karanbir Singh +44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc

1 0

Adding Linux Test Project content to our tests
by Karanbir Singh 15 Mar '13

15 Mar '13

hi, http://ltp.sourceforge.net/ "The Linux™ Test Project is a joint project started by SGI™ and maintained by IBM®, that has a goal to deliver test suites to the open source community that validate the reliability, robustness, and stability of Linux. The LTP testsuite contains a collection of tools for testing the Linux kernel and related features." ----------- In the week leading upto 6.4, Christoph Galuschka and I had started looking at how we might be able to integrate those tests into what we are doing. Since the 6.4 sprint kicked in, we resorted to just running the tests manually; Which worked well. However, I feel its worth putting these tests into the harness we have in place, and making sure they are run whenever we call for 'distro tests' or 'update tests'. One option is to have the entire suite run as a single tests/r_ltp/ suiet under t_functional; the other is to either have its own suite, we can directly import from upstream, or have it be a part of the t_external/ test suite ( along with the likes of wordpress / drupal and other things ). Thoughts ? - KB -- Karanbir Singh +44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc

3 4

Testing Nightly and Status Board
by Karanbir Singh 15 Mar '13

15 Mar '13

hi, At the moment, we run tests on a nightly basis, only in kvm vm's and the results dont go very far. I'd like to propose we use the entire QA bladecenter and run the entire compliment of deploys and tests, then post them in a status board which has some history ( stashboard ? ) Going one step further, we should run the entire t_functional tests as well as start incorporating some of the, now stale, t_external tests. At the moment we do deploys over http and nfs, to local and remote storage, under Xen, KVM, bare-metal and some virtualbox and some vmware hypervisors, for i386 and x86_64. I had a brief chat with Fabian about this yesterday, and we both think its doable, in the short term. Anyone else have thoughts about this ? or want to propose reporting mechanisms that might be better in line with the intended result : to give people a single perspective on the state of things, as a confidence point. And also to allow people to easily add tests that are then run nightly, so they can address their own corner cases. Regards, -- Karanbir Singh +44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc

4 5

Re: [CentOS-devel] Testing Nightly and Status Board
by Christoph Galuschka 14 Mar '13

14 Mar '13

> hi, > > At the moment, we run tests on a nightly basis, only in kvm vm's and the > results dont go very far. I'd like to propose we use the entire QA > bladecenter and run the entire compliment of deploys and tests, then > post them in a status board which has some history ( stashboard ? ) > > Going one step further, we should run the entire t_functional tests as > well as start incorporating some of the, now stale, t_external tests. > a very good proposal - gets my vote Christoph

1 0

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