devel

devel@lists.centos.org

4 participants
4592 discussions

CentOS SCLo SIG sync-up meeting on #centos-devel (2015-09-02)
by Honza Horak 02 Sep '15

02 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 = * cbs builds a bit stalled, devtoolset-3 seems to be issue; possible ways to move forward * dist-git repos creation -- should we create them at once manually for now? Honza

1 1

Fedora Collaboration
by Mike Ruckman 31 Aug '15

31 Aug '15

Greetings centos-devel! My name is Mike Ruckman and I'm working with the Fedora Cloud WG helping coordinate testing. There's been some discussions on IRC regarding Fedora and CentOS working together and I was asked to send a mail to the list with times and places for some of our meetings. Fedora QA --------- This is the group the Cloud WG has to work with to ensure that things are tested well enough - they do the final sign off after the WG has tested it's release items. They meet Mondays at 1500 UTC in #fedora-meeting on freenode. Fedora QA Devel --------------- This group is currently working on taskotron [0] and they maintain all of our QA applications. The Cloud WG will be working with them on getting some automated testing in place sometime in the future. They meet at 1400 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on freenode on Mondays. Fedora Cloud ------------ This one is pretty explanatory. We work on the cloud products for Fedora. The base image, docker image, atomic host and Vagrant boxes. We meet on Wednesdays at 1900 UTC in #fedora-meeting on freenode. There has also been talk of attempting to do a joint test day [1] for Atomic sometime in September. If there's enough interest, we can start planning and advertising for it now. Thanks! Let me know if you have any questions - or find me on irc. I'm roshi on freenode. [0] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Taskotron [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Test_Days -- // Mike -- Fedora QA freenode: roshi http://roshi.fedorapeople.org

1 0

Embargoed content in CBS
by Johnny Hughes 28 Aug '15

28 Aug '15

We have a need to be able to generate embargoed content for SIGs. As an example, Xen publishes embargoed content where we need to apply patches, build an SRPM and then binary RPMs. We can not do this in an open build system as the content must be embargoed until after the release date. What I think we need is password protected input and builds in the CBS and password protected repos for the resultant RPMs. We could then control access to those specific locations via login. Does the current version of koji support that? If not, we could create an embargoed build area(s) in the current CentOS build system, where the output of the build system is not transferred to buildlogs.centos.org .. but I would also need to point to the proper repos in the CBS as well. Who, besides the Xen rpms in the virt SIG might need this embargoed build capability? Thanks, Johnny Hughes

3 2

Storage SIG meeting tomorrow i.e. Friday 15:30 UTC
by Lalatendu Mohanty 27 Aug '15

27 Aug '15

Hi, It is been an while from last storage SIG meeting [1] . Lets meet tomorrow at 15:30 UTC on #centos-devel . We can do a show of hands and see if we can take the SIG further ahead. [1] https://www.centos.org/community/calendar/#Storage_SIG Thanks, Lala

1 0

docker 1.8 issues with pulling images
by dusty＠dustymabe.com 27 Aug '15

27 Aug '15

I was trying to use docker 1.8 [1] and I keep having issues pulling from the registry. See the issue upstream at [2]. Does anyone else see this? Dusty [1] - http://cbs.centos.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=3714 [2] - https://github.com/docker/docker/issues/15582

1 0

Common release rpm for Virt SIG
by Sandro Bonazzola 27 Aug '15

27 Aug '15

Hi, any news about the common release rpm for Virt SIG? Thanks, -- Sandro Bonazzola Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration. See how it works at redhat.com

2 1

openafs status?
by Jason Edgecombe 21 Aug '15

21 Aug '15

Hi everyone, I was curious about the status of the openafs work with the storage SIG. What's left to do? What are the blocking items? As I understand, there is an RPM without kernel modules. Thanks, Jason

5 15

CentOS SCLo SIG sync-up meeting on #centos-devel (2015-08-19)
by Honza Horak 19 Aug '15

19 Aug '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 = * cbs builds going, sharing status * dist-git repos creation -- any update? https://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=9219 * docker images based on SCL packages built in cbs how/where to build them? who can push them into docker hub? Honza

1 0

EL6 SCL packages
by Leon Fauster 18 Aug '15

18 Aug '15

This place may be more appropriate then centos-list. My subscription is new therefore sorry, if already asked: How is the centos policy for EL6 SCL packages? I see some activities about a sclo7 branch but how is the status for rhscl especially el6's ones? Thanks, LF

3 4

Central Auth: Group naming and Process Proposal
by Brian Stinson 18 Aug '15

18 Aug '15

Hi All, We're working on testing instances of FAS for storing our user/group membership information used by the CBS. I'd like to talk about group naming and the permissions model to get some input. The goal is to get these discussions going so we can set up our test environment to mirror what we'll roll out in production. Consider this a proposal, and please send comments my way (on-list please!). Groups will use the convention 'sig-<shortname>', for example: people in the Cloud SIG will be members of the FAS group 'sig-cloud'. This convention will allow push access in dist-git to any branch that starts with sig-cloud (sig-cloud7, sig-cloud7-openstack, sig-cloud7-openstack-juno) and grant build permissions under the SIG tags in Koji[0]. FAS has 3 types of membership in a group: Admin, Sponsor, and User. All 3 levels will be granted commit/build permissions, while only Admins and Sponsors can modify members of the group. To match our permissions model[1], I propose: - We populate the 'Accounts' (Global Admin) group with the members of the CentOS Board. - The Board member responsible for each SIG will create the appropriate SIG group in FAS - The Board member will add him/herself as an admin of the group - The Board member will sponsor the SIG Chair as a sponsor for the group - From then on, the SIG Chair and Board member can sponsor others into the group as users (and optionally add more sponsors to the group) Anyone have thoughts? Once we reach consensus, I'll get this written up for the SIG wiki page. Cheers! Brian [0]: http://wiki.centos.org/BrianStinson/GitBranchesandKojiTags [1]: http://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup

5 4

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