devel

devel@lists.centos.org

4 participants
4640 discussions

Update from CentOS PaaS SIG
by Gleidson Nascimento 09 Jan '20

09 Jan '20

Hello from CentOS PaaS SIG! We have recently published an update on CentOS blog [1] about OKD v4 and its current state on CentOS. [1] https://blog.centos.org/2020/01/centos-paas-sig-quarterly-report-2/ Thanks, Gleidson

4 3

Re: [CentOS-devel] A Big Idea for a New Decade [was: Minutes for CentOS Board of Directors 2019-12-18 Meeting]
by Patrick Laimbock 08 Jan '20

08 Jan '20

-----Original message----- >From: Carl George<carl(a)redhat.com> >Sent: Wednesday 8th January 2020 17:01 >To: The CentOS developers mailing list. <centos-devel(a)centos.org> >Subject: Re: [CentOS-devel] A Big Idea for a New Decade [was: Minutes for CentOS Board of Directors 2019-12-18 Meeting] > >> While I agree with consolidation, over time, of the SIGs, I do think the name >> should be “Enterprise Linux Community SIGs” or similar. I get that Red Hat has >> a massive influence in all four flavours (Fedora, RHEL, CentOS, Streams), but >> for someone new to the communities, it could be confusing to refer to them as >> “Red Hat”, as most people outside the community see “Red Hat” as referring only >> to “RHEL” and not the wider Enterprise Linux ecosystem. > >Fedora is not Enterprise Linux. To me, the name "Enterprise Linux Community" >excludes Fedora. Im not married to the name "Red Hat Community", but its the >best name I can think of that accurately conveys the scope. What term would >you use to describe the entire ecosystem of Fedora, RHEL, CentOS, CentOS >Stream, and EPEL? Ive always called this the "Red Hat ecosystem". To me the Red Hat ecosystem has always been RHEL plus all RHXXX products plus upstream work. The entire ecosystem is all RPM based but "RPM Community SIGs" is not inclusive enough so does not do it for me. How about "Open Community SIGs" or "Open Linux Community SIGs"? It's neutral. It's Open. This is the way :-) Best, Patrick

1 0

keepassxc dependency issue
by Andy Hall 08 Jan '20

08 Jan '20

please advise if there is a repo which needs enabling on centos 8 for this to work $ cat /etc/centos-release CentOS Linux release 8.1.1911 (Core) $ sudo yum install keepassxc [sudo] password for ahall: Last metadata expiration check: 0:12:51 ago on Wed 08 Jan 2020 07:52:00 GMT. Error: Problem: conflicting requests - nothing provides libsodium.so.23()(64bit) needed by keepassxc-2.4.3-4.epel8.playground.x86_64 - nothing provides libargon2.so.1()(64bit) needed by keepassxc-2.4.3-4.epel8.playground.x86_64 - nothing provides libykpers-1.so.1()(64bit) needed by keepassxc-2.4.3-4.epel8.playground.x86_64 - nothing provides libykpers-1.so.1(LIBYKPERS_1.0)(64bit) needed by keepassxc-2.4.3-4.epel8.playground.x86_64 - nothing provides libykpers-1.so.1(LIBYKPERS_1.5)(64bit) needed by keepassxc-2.4.3-4.epel8.playground.x86_64 - nothing provides libykpers-1.so.1(LIBYKPERS_1.8)(64bit) needed by keepassxc-2.4.3-4.epel8.playground.x86_64 (try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages or '--nobest' to use not only best candidate packages) I don't see the required packages for 8 here: https://pkgs.org/download/libsodium https://pkgs.org/download/libargon2 https://pkgs.org/download/libykpers-1 thanks very much

3 2

clusterlabs & HA
by lejeczek 08 Jan '20

08 Jan '20

hi everybody, I see there is a ticket for resurrection of HA in 8 but I was hoping devel could clarify or maybe even officially declare the future of HA stack(as we have it in 7) with regards to 8. Please? many thanks, L.

2 2

[cloudSIG] Proposal to Change CloudSIG Meeting Time
by Rain Leander 08 Jan '20

08 Jan '20

Hello all During the winter time, there are collisions with the schedule for a few community members as well as a quite late time for a few members. So, I'd like to propose a change in the meeting time, to start one hour SOONER than it does now. Proposal: Thursday 14:00 UTC (1500 CET / 1930 IST / 0900 EST) Current: Thursday 1500 UTC (1600 CET / 2030 IST / 1000 EST) Please let us know if this proposal works for you by replying to this email or reaching out directly to leanderthal on IRC #centos-devel. Thanks so much! -- K Rain Leander OpenStack Community Liaison Open Source Program Office https://www.rdoproject.org/ http://community.redhat.com

1 0

CentOS Stream panel discussion at the FOSDEM Dojo
by Rich Bowen 07 Jan '20

07 Jan '20

With the lovely conversation going about what we want to change/refresh/burn down in 2020, I want to be sure that you're aware of the CentOS Stream panel discussion which will be the first session at the upcoming Dojo in Brussels. If you're not already aware, the Dojo will happen on Friday, December 31st - the day before FOSDEM - and will be held at the Marriott Grand Place. Registration is free, but we ask you to sign up, so that we can plan for catering. Details are at https://wiki.centos.org/Events/Dojo/Brussels2020 The CentOS Stream panel will include people from the board, from Red Hat engineering, and from the community, who will discuss what is happening in CentOS Stream, hear your feedback, and help shape what the future of the project looks like. So, please join us, share your thoughts, and learn what is planned, and what our target dates are for various deliverables. See you in Brussels! -- Rich Bowen - rbowen(a)redhat.com @CentOSProject // @rbowen 859 351 9166

1 1

C8 updates / CentOS-announce
by Leon Fauster 07 Jan '20

07 Jan '20

Do package updates for C8 get announced via centos-announce list? If not whats the new communication "channel"? I see updates but no corresponding announcement ... -- Leon

7 15

Re: [CentOS-devel] A Big Idea for a New Decade [was: Minutes for CentOS Board of Directors 2019-12-18 Meeting]
by Neal Gompa 07 Jan '20

07 Jan '20

On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 8:48 AM Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh(a)redhat.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 7:11 AM Neal Gompa <ngompa13(a)gmail.com> wrote: > ... > > What I'm more concerned about is that if you eliminate Fedora from any > > meaningful server based development, you strip all the opportunities > > for people to iterate on server-oriented changes before they go into > > rhel-rawhide and push into CentOS Stream. You also essentially kneecap > > any motivation for other things related to server environments to > > iterate faster (such as language stacks that are heavily used for web > > service software) because you've eliminated the major ability for that > > to ship to users and contributors. It also further accelerates a trend > > that I think we need to reverse where people consider Fedora > > unacceptable for server roles. If anything, Fedora is a lot better at > > being used for servers then it was five years ago. I've personally > > *stopped* using CentOS for servers because Fedora has gotten so good > > at it. Upgrades are a breeze and stuff generally works. When it > > doesn't, it's fixable! That last part is key. With CentOS, it's not, > > because it has to bounce back into Red Hat first. And Red Hat doesn't > > really care about issues discovered by CentOS users, and there are no > > "CentOS developers". > > > > > > So, what this long email is actually saying is that I think it's an > > interesting idea to bring the two projects together, but eliminating > > aspects of Fedora in favor of CentOS is premature because CentOS has > > not actually developed as a community project. Maybe it's worth > > revisiting after six years of actual community development? > > > I don't think Matthew suggested that we'd stop development of server > technologies in Fedora. I think he was saying that we'd drop the > "Fedora Server Edition" as a user-targeted deliverable. This is an > important distinction. We'd instead focus on server technology > development atop the container and Fedora Cloud Edition use-cases. Today's Cloud Edition is mostly a further stripped down Server Edition variant with different words in the branding. It's our deliverable for clouds like AWS and cloud-like VPSes like DigitalOcean. However, Fedora Server Edition is what people use to run their *own* servers with Fedora, and that also includes things like VMs in more traditional hypervisor setups (oVirt/RHV, VMware, XCP-ng/XenServer, etc.). The key difference between Server and Cloud Edition is the usage of Anaconda to install Fedora. I'm pretty sure we still want to be continually validating *that* works, especially since it's a different codepath in Anaconda from the desktop flavors. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!

2 1

Agenda for CentOS Board of Directors 2020-01-08 meeting
by Karsten Wade 07 Jan '20

07 Jan '20

As published here: https://blog.centos.org/2020/01/agenda-for-centos-board-of-directors-2020-0… Public agenda On Wednesday 08 January 2020, the CentOS Board of Directors will hold its first meeting of the decade and 2020 calendar year. Below is the agenda for that meeting that can be shared with the community and wider public. 1. Adopt minutes from 2019-12-18 2. Build pipeline changes 1. Update from Jim/KB 3. Project goals refresh 1. Working session with the draft process doc 2. Planning to announce and begin process in coming weeks 4. Rolling (last from 2019-12-18, new items to the rolling agenda highlighted as [NEW]): 1. [NEW] Reporting on and better understanding the build process for CentOS Linux 8 and the update lag / point release challenges 2. [NEW] Trademark Guidelines review: 1. What works & what does not. 2. What do we want to get fixed; who wants to work on that. 3. [NEW] Looking at new Board membership and structure (ongoing) 1. On hold while goals discussion is held, which includes a review and update of governance. We’ll figure out what model we want from that and how this idea might fit. 4. Any other topics aka What other things do you want on our key initiatives list? 5. New branding work underway 1. Website update work: https://github.com/areguera/centos-style-websites 2. Framework proposed into logo discussion: https://git.centos.org/centos/Artwork/issue/1#comment-62 6. Stepping-up our meeting norms (ongoing) 7. Transparency initiatives (ongoing) -- Karsten Wade [he/him/his]| Senior Community Architect | @quaid Red Hat Open Source Program Office (OSPO) : @redhatopen https://community.redhat.com | https://next.redhat.com | https://theopensourceway.org gpg: AD0E0C41 | https://red.ht/sig

1 0

centos-packager update for Fedora 31?
by Matthias Runge 04 Jan '20

04 Jan '20

Hi there, is there an updated centos-packager version somewhere, that works with Fedora 31? sudo dnf install centos-packager Last metadata expiration check: 1:35:13 ago on Thu 02 Jan 2020 05:30:08 CET. Error: Problem: package centos-packager-0.5.5-2.fc28.noarch requires python-centos, but none of the providers can be installed - conflicting requests - nothing provides python-urllib3 needed by python-centos-0.1.1-2.fc28.noarch - nothing provides python-lockfile needed by python-centos-0.1.1-2.fc28.noarch - nothing provides python-munch needed by python-centos-0.1.1-2.fc28.noarch (try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages) Best, Matthias

3 6

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