On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 11:39:05AM +0000, Karanbir Singh wrote: > > This is the plan in Fedora, by the way, and I'm working with the Anaconda > > team to make enhancements so there won't need to be as much trimming. > > The latter part probably help you guys for a few years :) but it'd be nice > > to be using the same basic approach. > Sounds good, where can we track this effort ? I'm writing a feature proposal for F21, which should be _part_ of tracking it. I'm also working on getting our own tracking in a bit better shape... someone in our SIG is setting up a Cantas (open source trello-alike) board which I hope will help keep this organized better. > Also, it would be good to sync and share with the Fedora cloud folks, my > attempts at doing this in the past have mostly been met with cold > sholder like responses. I hope that wasn't me. I think it's mostly a lack of time, not actual maliciousness. Speaking personally, I'm terrible at followups and apologize in advance. :) > > Could you tell me more about the train wreck here? I want to make sure we > > don't recreate it. :) > Nightly builds are good, as long as they are communicated as such and > people understand that if they want to own the feature spec, they need > to own their own infra to build, test and deploy based on those. For > everyone else, setting a baseline in time does not seem to map very well > to any app requirements. Reducing those to map to iso release points has > been far more productive, and people have a better ( and easier, > requiring far less communication to get across ) map of content and > where things are. > The question it boils down to is : why are we building these images, > where do we anticipate them being used and for what purpose. Makes sense. Thanks. -- Matthew Miller mattdm at mattdm.org <http://mattdm.org/>