----- Original Message -----

From: "Jason Brooks" jbrooks@redhat.com To: "The CentOS developers mailing list." centos-devel@centos.org Sent: Monday, March 9, 2015 12:14:22 PM Subject: Re: [CentOS-devel] 4 week Atomic Releases?

----- Original Message -----

...

From: "Michael P. McGrath" mmcgrath@redhat.com To: centos-devel@centos.org Sent: Monday, March 9, 2015 8:53:32 AM Subject: [CentOS-devel] 4 week Atomic Releases?

In conjunction with this Fedora Atomic thread: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/cloud/2015-March/004976.html

I'd like to continue discussion about CentOS Atomic and a move to a 4 week release cycle. I'm specifically targeting CentOS Atomic here, and as it turns out we are very close to doing this today with a new Atomic build being targeted roughly every Month by Ian.

In the larger ecosystem, the development versions released in Fedora would be tested there for a bit and then drawn down to the CentOS Atomic image and released. We think we can move a bit faster in Atomic because of it's simple rollback function.

Since the CentOS Atomic images are already so close to what is being proposed, this is likely to be a formalization of what is being done and better highlighting of the CentOS Atomic image on the projectatomic.io website.

Any thoughts or comments?

I think we should discuss/consider how this relates to RHEL Atomic -- it sounds like CentOS tracking Fedora, where elsewhere CentOS tracks RHEL.

Would it make sense to have both devel and stable editions of CentOS Atomic, to give users the option of leading or of following?

We can certainly do that on the CentOS side if it's warranted, but on http://www.projectatomic.io/download/ we only want three links to send users to, one of them is the more stable CentOS link.

To me, Fedora is where you go when you want to work on Docker/Kubernets/etc. CentOS is where you go if you want to do Docker image development. There's a bit of a circular relationship between RHEL and CentOS on Atomic, but I think that it will feel natural to people as we get into it. It helps that the Atomic OS is so small in package set by design.

As far as RHEL Atomic Host goes, we are wanting to better align some of Red Hat's work with the community and that probably means more rapid iteration and release of RHEL Atomic Host. I think what everyone wants to avoid is RHEL getting features before Fedora and CentOS

-Mike

Jason

...

-- Mike McGrath | mmcgrath@redhat.com | (312) 660-3547 Atomic | Red Hat Chicago | http://projectatomic.io/ _______________________________________________ CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel

---

CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel