[CentOS-devel] 4 week Atomic Releases?

[Michael P. McGrath]

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jason Brooks" <jbrooks at redhat.com>
> To: "The CentOS developers mailing list." <centos-devel at 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 at redhat.com>
> > To: centos-devel at 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 at redhat.com | (312) 660-3547
> > Atomic | Red Hat Chicago | http://projectatomic.io/
> > _______________________________________________
> > CentOS-devel mailing list
> > CentOS-devel at centos.org
> > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
> > 
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS-devel mailing list
> CentOS-devel at centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
>