From giedrius.rekasius at gmail.com Mon Dec 2 13:52:04 2019 From: giedrius.rekasius at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Giedrius_Reka=C5=A1ius?=) Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2019 13:52:04 +0000 Subject: [CentOS-devel] CentOS 7.7 patch for RHSA-2019:3979 Message-ID: Hello, I see that patch for https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2019:3979 is not available yet. Are there any plans to release it this week? Regards, Giedrius -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rleander at redhat.com Mon Dec 2 15:35:32 2019 From: rleander at redhat.com (Rain Leander) Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2019 16:35:32 +0100 Subject: [CentOS-devel] [cloudSIG]Mtg Notes 28nov2019 Message-ID: Meeting summary 1. *rollcall* (leanderthal , 15:01:00) 2. *follow up re: multi arch: https://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=16590 * (leanderthal , 15:08:05) 1. https://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=16590 (leanderthal , 15:08:15) 2. https://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=16558#c35471 (leanderthal , 15:09:36) 3. *ACTION*: leanderthal to follow up with kb / rbowen / centos infra team / board / the world (leanderthal , 15:18:35) 3. *chair for next week* (leanderthal , 15:18:43) 4. *open floor* (leanderthal , 15:24:16) 1. https://review.rdoproject.org/etherpad/p/rebuild-deps-centos8 ( leanderthal , 15:24:50) 2. *ACTION*: leanderthal to follow up with rbowen and bstinson re: rebuild-deps-centos8 (leanderthal , 15:29:26) Meeting ended at 15:42:44 UTC (full logs ). Action items 1. leanderthal to follow up with kb / rbowen / centos infra team / board / the world 2. leanderthal to follow up with rbowen and bstinson re: rebuild-deps-centos8 Action items, by person 1. leanderthal 1. leanderthal to follow up with kb / rbowen / centos infra team / board / the world 2. leanderthal to follow up with rbowen and bstinson re: rebuild-deps-centos8 People present (lines said) 1. leanderthal (43) 2. Arrfab (20) 3. centbot (3) -- K Rain Leander OpenStack Community Liaison Open Source Program Office https://www.rdoproject.org/ http://community.redhat.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jperrin at centos.org Tue Dec 3 16:46:06 2019 From: jperrin at centos.org (Jim Perrin) Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2019 08:46:06 -0800 Subject: [CentOS-devel] Minutes for CentOS Board of Directors 2019-11-13 Meeting In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 11/27/19 6:34 AM, Patrick Laimbock wrote: > Hi Karsten, > > Thank you for the update. > >> Topics covered in the meeting and via email are discussed below, and >> remain open on the Board?s rolling agenda for future conversation and >> actions: >> >> ? 1. Board membership: >> ????? 1. The Board has been considering for some time adjusting the >> ???????? membership of the Board, in particular by adding new Directors. >> ???????? Discussions with potential new Directors will begin. > > That's great news. Will the process be similar to how it's done in the Fedora Project [1]? So with a public list of nominees, published interview with each nominee and public voting results? Is there a way for the Community to (self-)nominate? > It's something we could consider, but this isn't how it's been discussed so far. > For better Community coverage perhaps CentOS Board related postings could also be sent to the centos-announce and centos mailinglists? I'm sort of against sending these to -announce, but only because we have a number of people who parse that list with automated tooling, not because folks actually read it. I don't want to change expectations and tooling without a good reason. I could see sending to the centos main list though. > > Thanks, > Patrick > > [1] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/program_management/elections/ > _______________________________________________ > CentOS-devel mailing list > CentOS-devel at centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel > -- Jim Perrin The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77 From arrfab at centos.org Wed Dec 4 17:14:54 2019 From: arrfab at centos.org (Fabian Arrotin) Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2019 18:14:54 +0100 Subject: [CentOS-devel] [Infra] - Planned outage/migration : wiki.centos.org Message-ID: Due to a software upgrade and hardware migration, we'll have to move the existing CentOS Wiki instance (aka https://wiki.centos.org) to a new node. Migration is scheduled for """"Monday December 9th, 9:00 am UTC time"""". You can convert to local time with $(date -d '2019-12-9 9:00 UTC') The expected "downtime" is estimated to ~60 minutes , time needed to : - freeze wiki instance data - convert to newer moin data format - import converted data to new host and validate - switch DNS record and propagation Worth knowing that during the migration process, the wiki instance will not be available. Thanks for your comprehending and patience. on behalf of the Infra team, -- Fabian Arrotin The CentOS Project | https://www.centos.org gpg key: 17F3B7A1 | twitter: @arrfab -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 833 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From brian at bstinson.com Wed Dec 4 21:07:54 2019 From: brian at bstinson.com (Brian Stinson) Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2019 15:07:54 -0600 Subject: [CentOS-devel] CentOS 8 docker images In-Reply-To: <83ebb145-c19d-6a7c-90fe-9876fe929004@redhat.com> References: <279858e6-04a1-4635-b079-c4a41413b808@www.fastmail.com> <83ebb145-c19d-6a7c-90fe-9876fe929004@redhat.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Dec 4, 2019, at 13:37, Philippe Mathieu-Daud? wrote: > Hello Brian, > > On 9/27/19 3:29 PM, brian at bstinson.com (Brian Stinson) wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 26, 2019, at 22:30, Lance Albertson wrote: > >> When can we expect docker images with CentOS 8? I see there's already an issue [1] open for it. Is there anything we can do to help make it happen? > >> > >> Thanks! > >> > >> [1] https://github.com/CentOS/sig-cloud-instance-images/issues/151 > >> > >> -- > >> Lance Albertson > > > > Here's what we're working through: > > > > We have cloud and container images built, but we currently aren't happy with the base image size produced by our tooling. > > > > Both cloud and container images are in the QA process and we'll get them out as soon as they're ready. > > Any news on this? > > Thanks, > > Phil. `podman pull centos:8` should get you the container images. Cloud images are something we're working through targeting the upcoming Stream 8 and Linux 8.1.1911 releases. --Brian From abokovoy at redhat.com Thu Dec 5 07:59:45 2019 From: abokovoy at redhat.com (Alexander Bokovoy) Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2019 09:59:45 +0200 Subject: [CentOS-devel] CentOS 8 docker images In-Reply-To: References: <279858e6-04a1-4635-b079-c4a41413b808@www.fastmail.com> <83ebb145-c19d-6a7c-90fe-9876fe929004@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20191205075945.GO1691659@redhat.com> On ke, 04 joulu 2019, Brian Stinson wrote: > >On Wed, Dec 4, 2019, at 13:37, Philippe Mathieu-Daud? wrote: >> Hello Brian, >> >> On 9/27/19 3:29 PM, brian at bstinson.com (Brian Stinson) wrote: >> > On Thu, Sep 26, 2019, at 22:30, Lance Albertson wrote: >> >> When can we expect docker images with CentOS 8? I see there's already an issue [1] open for it. Is there anything we can do to help make it happen? >> >> >> >> Thanks! >> >> >> >> [1] https://github.com/CentOS/sig-cloud-instance-images/issues/151 >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Lance Albertson >> > >> > Here's what we're working through: >> > >> > We have cloud and container images built, but we currently aren't happy with the base image size produced by our tooling. >> > >> > Both cloud and container images are in the QA process and we'll get them out as soon as they're ready. >> >> Any news on this? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Phil. > >`podman pull centos:8` should get you the container images. Thanks. This works for x86_64. I wonder if there are plans for aarch64? -- / Alexander Bokovoy Sr. Principal Software Engineer Security / Identity Management Engineering Red Hat Limited, Finland From marcin.juszkiewicz at linaro.org Thu Dec 5 08:09:29 2019 From: marcin.juszkiewicz at linaro.org (Marcin Juszkiewicz) Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2019 09:09:29 +0100 Subject: [CentOS-devel] CentOS 8 docker images In-Reply-To: <20191205075945.GO1691659@redhat.com> References: <279858e6-04a1-4635-b079-c4a41413b808@www.fastmail.com> <83ebb145-c19d-6a7c-90fe-9876fe929004@redhat.com> <20191205075945.GO1691659@redhat.com> Message-ID: <07277fa3-8e96-9bb3-2b05-e135e39c4696@linaro.org> W dniu 05.12.2019 o 08:59, Alexander Bokovoy pisze: > On ke, 04 joulu 2019, Brian Stinson wrote: >> `podman pull centos:8` should get you the container images. > > Thanks. This works for x86_64. I wonder if there are plans for > aarch64? Jim Perrin wrote on 6th October 2019: > Yeah, I need to work through the aarch64 and ppc64le containers with > bstinson still. Hopefully we'll be able to get those done soon. Looks like we have to wait still. From abokovoy at redhat.com Thu Dec 5 08:16:47 2019 From: abokovoy at redhat.com (Alexander Bokovoy) Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2019 10:16:47 +0200 Subject: [CentOS-devel] CentOS 8 docker images In-Reply-To: <07277fa3-8e96-9bb3-2b05-e135e39c4696@linaro.org> References: <279858e6-04a1-4635-b079-c4a41413b808@www.fastmail.com> <83ebb145-c19d-6a7c-90fe-9876fe929004@redhat.com> <20191205075945.GO1691659@redhat.com> <07277fa3-8e96-9bb3-2b05-e135e39c4696@linaro.org> Message-ID: <20191205081647.GP1691659@redhat.com> On to, 05 joulu 2019, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote: >W dniu 05.12.2019 o 08:59, Alexander Bokovoy pisze: >> On ke, 04 joulu 2019, Brian Stinson wrote: > >>> `podman pull centos:8` should get you the container images. >> >> Thanks. This works for x86_64. I wonder if there are plans for >> aarch64? > >Jim Perrin wrote on 6th October 2019: > >> Yeah, I need to work through the aarch64 and ppc64le containers with >> bstinson still. Hopefully we'll be able to get those done soon. > >Looks like we have to wait still. Thanks, Marcin! -- / Alexander Bokovoy Sr. Principal Software Engineer Security / Identity Management Engineering Red Hat Limited, Finland From akshayk at gmail.com Thu Dec 5 14:31:16 2019 From: akshayk at gmail.com (Akshay Kumar) Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2019 09:31:16 -0500 Subject: [CentOS-devel] CentOS 8 docker images In-Reply-To: <279858e6-04a1-4635-b079-c4a41413b808@www.fastmail.com> References: <279858e6-04a1-4635-b079-c4a41413b808@www.fastmail.com> Message-ID: At least for the cloud images we have never been happy with the frequency and timing of the releases, eg 7.7 images are still not out. We used to take the raw image and generate cloud images for all the 3 public clouds but with 8.1 image builder finally supports GCP as well so you can just use that to build custom cloud images for AWS, GCP and Azure in a unified way. https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_enterprise_linux/8/html/composing_a_customized_rhel_system_image/index On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 9:30 AM Brian Stinson wrote: > On Thu, Sep 26, 2019, at 22:30, Lance Albertson wrote: > > When can we expect docker images with CentOS 8? I see there's already an > issue [1] open for it. Is there anything we can do to help make it happen? > > Thanks! > > [1] https://github.com/CentOS/sig-cloud-instance-images/issues/151 > > -- > Lance Albertson > Director > Oregon State University | Open Source Lab > _______________________________________________ > CentOS-devel mailing list > CentOS-devel at centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel > > > Here's what we're working through: > > We have cloud and container images built, but we currently aren't happy > with the base image size produced by our tooling. > > Both cloud and container images are in the QA process and we'll get them > out as soon as they're ready. > > Cheers! > -- > Brian > _______________________________________________ > CentOS-devel mailing list > CentOS-devel at centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nkadel at gmail.com Fri Dec 6 02:58:47 2019 From: nkadel at gmail.com (Nico Kadel-Garcia) Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2019 21:58:47 -0500 Subject: [CentOS-devel] CentOS 8 docker images In-Reply-To: References: <279858e6-04a1-4635-b079-c4a41413b808@www.fastmail.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 9:31 AM Akshay Kumar wrote: > > At least for the cloud images we have never been happy with the frequency and timing of the releases, eg 7.7 images are still not out. We used to take the raw image and generate cloud images for all the 3 public clouds but with 8.1 image builder finally supports GCP as well so you can just use that to build custom cloud images for AWS, GCP and Azure in a unified way. Since it is a matter of a few minutes work to install one, run an update, and store your personal imae *with* enhanced networking enabled, Isn't it enough to simply have a base older OS to work with? If necessary, you can even restrict your updates to not use the "updates" repositories and only update to the next release time base image. RHEL does not support this without a nightmare of grabbing a DVD image and mounting that somewhere to get the release time packages only, but CentOS releases have been very good about publishing the release time base operating system in clearn format. From fedoraproject at cyberpear.com Fri Dec 6 03:03:02 2019 From: fedoraproject at cyberpear.com (James Cassell) Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2019 22:03:02 -0500 Subject: [CentOS-devel] CentOS 8 docker images In-Reply-To: References: <279858e6-04a1-4635-b079-c4a41413b808@www.fastmail.com> Message-ID: <774b17d9-17e1-48d2-be10-867858b09d68@www.fastmail.com> On Thu, Dec 5, 2019, at 9:58 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: > On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 9:31 AM Akshay Kumar wrote: > > > > At least for the cloud images we have never been happy with the frequency and timing of the releases, eg 7.7 images are still not out. We used to take the raw image and generate cloud images for all the 3 public clouds but with 8.1 image builder finally supports GCP as well so you can just use that to build custom cloud images for AWS, GCP and Azure in a unified way. > > Since it is a matter of a few minutes work to install one, run an > update, and store your personal imae *with* enhanced networking > enabled, Isn't it enough to simply have a base older OS to work with? > If necessary, you can even restrict your updates to not use the > "updates" repositories and only update to the next release time base > image. RHEL does not support this without a nightmare of grabbing a > DVD image and mounting that somewhere to get the release time packages > only, but CentOS releases have been very good about publishing the > release time base operating system in clearn format. RHEL provides "kickstart" trees for each minor release, same as CentOS 8. From dan.seguin at Cord3Inc.com Fri Dec 6 06:40:15 2019 From: dan.seguin at Cord3Inc.com (Dan Seguin) Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2019 06:40:15 +0000 Subject: [CentOS-devel] CentOS 8 docker images In-Reply-To: <774b17d9-17e1-48d2-be10-867858b09d68@www.fastmail.com> References: <279858e6-04a1-4635-b079-c4a41413b808@www.fastmail.com> , <774b17d9-17e1-48d2-be10-867858b09d68@www.fastmail.com> Message-ID: <1575614414403.90429@Cord3Inc.com> ________________________________________ From: CentOS-devel on behalf of James Cassell Sent: December 5, 2019 10:03 PM To: CentOS Devel List Subject: Re: [CentOS-devel] CentOS 8 docker images On Thu, Dec 5, 2019, at 9:58 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: > On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 9:31 AM Akshay Kumar wrote: > > > > At least for the cloud images we have never been happy with the frequency and timing of the releases, eg 7.7 images are still not out. We used to take the raw image and generate cloud images for all the 3 public clouds but with 8.1 image builder finally supports GCP as well so you can just use that to build custom cloud images for AWS, GCP and Azure in a unified way. > > Since it is a matter of a few minutes work to install one, run an > update, and store your personal imae *with* enhanced networking > enabled, Isn't it enough to simply have a base older OS to work with? > If necessary, you can even restrict your updates to not use the > "updates" repositories and only update to the next release time base > image. RHEL does not support this without a nightmare of grabbing a > DVD image and mounting that somewhere to get the release time packages > only, but CentOS releases have been very good about publishing the > release time base operating system in clearn format. RHEL provides "kickstart" trees for each minor release, same as CentOS 8. And "kickstart"s are still way behind and broken. _______________________________________________ CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel at centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel From amoloney at redhat.com Sat Dec 7 02:37:39 2019 From: amoloney at redhat.com (Aoife Moloney) Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2019 02:37:39 +0000 Subject: [CentOS-devel] CPE Weekly:2019-12-06 Message-ID: Hi everyone, Welcome to the CPE team weekly project update mail! Background: The Community Platform Engineering group is the Red Hat team combining IT and release engineering from Fedora and CentOS. Our goal is to keep core servers and services running and maintained, build releases, and other strategic tasks that need more dedicated time than volunteers can give. For better communication, we will be giving weekly reports to the CentOS and Fedora communities about the general tasks and work being done. Also for better communication between our groups we have created #redhat-cpe on Freenode IRC! Please feel free to catch us there, a mail has landed on both the CentOS and Fedora devel lists with context here. Note: This document is currently built from individual reports rolled into a google document which we edit and copy into a final document. We are aware that this causes problems with some email readers, and are working on a method to make this less problematic. High Level Project Updates: CentOS: Migrated this week (new pkg, new ansible-role): Torrent.centos.org Ipv6.torrent.centos.org Prepared to be migrated next week: Wiki.centos.org Kicked off : new ansible roles in progress for : Bind to support dynamic delegated zone for acme dns-challenge Mailman and postfix CentOS Stream We have our first compose gone to Red Hat Internal QA for testing Other work still progressing on the builders Fedora: OSBS : aarch64 hosts ready for the deployment of an OpenShift cluster. https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/8442 The Community Fire Team (CFT) is a team of people dedicated to fixing bugs, annoyance and (small) RFE all around our applications. Their work is tracked in taiga at: https://teams.fedoraproject.org/project/community-fire-team/kanban and they use #fedora-apps for discussion and coordination. As usual, anyone is welcome to join the team, for a day, a task or more! This week CFT has achieved the following work: Release and deploy pagure 5.8.1 Changelog at: https://docs.pagure.org/pagure/changelog.html#id1 Release and deploy pagure-dist-git 1.5.2 Fixes enabling the pull-request only workflow on dist-git Fix getting the CI pipeline results to show on PR on dist-git Fix the script syncing the default assignee and CC list from dist-git to bugzilla So far there were no negative feedback about the changes this script will do Deploy the script syncing default assignee and CC list from dist-git to bugzilla on openshift in staging And is actively working on: Enabling side-tag based updates in stable releases Adding a new API endpoint to pagure to enable/disable git hooks Adding tests for the fedora-messaging support in the JMS plugin (used by ci.centos.org) Making ansible-review work with the infrastructure's ansible repository Fixing the mdapi integration on dist-git's package page F31 Updates kojipkgs01/02 has been reinstalled Robosign config for fcos has been updated Rawhide Gating: Team still welcomes any input and feedback on your experience with Rawhide Gating to date as we move through our testing ahead of making it generally available Bodhi Application Retirements Elections Elections are ready to be moved to Communishift! The move will be planned after the current elections are over. Fedocal Still no progress on kanban board last six weeks https://teams.fedoraproject.org/project/fedora-calendar/kanban Jlanda?s permission error in communishift should now be fixed https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/8274 There may be still another permission error so the team are investigating Still working on running local instance Nuancier Benson Muite is now working on OIDC authentication A PR will be created on Github to test if we can see the progress New PR from sebwoj - Porting to Fedora messaging is under review Autocloud retired Tests of cloud images moved to openqa Retired vm?s and removed from ansible Turning bare metal nodes into builders. Fedora Docs Updates Open Tickets: https://pagure.io/Ask-Fedora-SOP-docs/issue/7 https://pagure.io/fesco/fesco-docs/pull-request/21 Merges: https://pagure.io/fedora-docs/quick-docs/pull-request/164 Fixes: https://pagure.io/fedora-docs/docs-fp-o/issue/111 Misc Koji production is upgraded to 1.19.1 Bodhi builds are now based on git Changes added to Bodhi to add support for side-tags in stable releases are pending reviews https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/pull/3749 https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/pull/3761 https://pagure.io/Fedora-Infra/distgit-bugzilla-sync/pull-request/35 Email with the Bugzilla-distgit sync script changes have been sent to devel-announce for review Link to mail New changes to Pagure pending review: New API endpoint to enable/disable git hooks Ability to set dist-git in the default assignee overrides for bugzilla Direct API interface Button on the pagure package web interface EPEL 8 modularity Bodhi composes are stuck staging so this is causing a delay in testing epel8 bodhi composes epel8-playground-modules composes are failing right now in staging, but the team are looking into it Aarch64 is now racked and networked Koji New koji owner script was debugged Koji client was updated Koji was also patched for the --title option fix Configured migrations from Ansible/Jinja template https://pagure.io/Fedora-Infra/distgit-bugzilla-sync/pull-request/1 https://pagure.io/Fedora-Infra/distgit-bugzilla-sync/pull-request/3 https://pagure.io/Fedora-Infra/distgit-bugzilla-sync/pull-request/11 https://pagure.io/Fedora-Infra/distgit-bugzilla-sync/pull-request/14 https://pagure.io/Fedora-Infra/distgit-bugzilla-sync/pull-request/16 Comments? Suggestions? Feedback? Let Us Know! Have a great weekend! Aoife -- Aoife Moloney Feature Driver Community Platform Engineering Team Red Hat EMEA Communications House Cork Road Waterford From joe at solidadmin.com Sat Dec 7 08:23:30 2019 From: joe at solidadmin.com (Joe Doss) Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2019 02:23:30 -0600 Subject: [CentOS-devel] CentOS 8 Ruby Modules Message-ID: <38ff2ec3-ffdc-b462-b7e6-ff1cbb0fecd8@solidadmin.com> Hey there, Is there any method to install the modules from https://koji.mbox.centos.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=2190 I can't download from koji and I want to test some issues that I am seeing with our ruby app on a different ruby version on CentOS 8. Is there any way I can get access to theses or are there any plans to enable more Appstreams for ruby on CentOS 8? Thanks, Joe -- Joe Doss joe at solidadmin.com From brian at bstinson.com Sat Dec 7 17:27:58 2019 From: brian at bstinson.com (Brian Stinson) Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2019 11:27:58 -0600 Subject: [CentOS-devel] CentOS 8 Ruby Modules In-Reply-To: <38ff2ec3-ffdc-b462-b7e6-ff1cbb0fecd8@solidadmin.com> References: <38ff2ec3-ffdc-b462-b7e6-ff1cbb0fecd8@solidadmin.com> Message-ID: On Sat, Dec 7, 2019, at 02:23, Joe Doss wrote: > Hey there, > > Is there any method to install the modules from > https://koji.mbox.centos.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=2190 > > I can't download from koji and I want to test some issues that I am > seeing with our ruby app on a different ruby version on CentOS 8. > > Is there any way I can get access to theses or are there any plans to > enable more Appstreams for ruby on CentOS 8? > > Thanks, > Joe > > > > > -- > Joe Doss > joe at solidadmin.com > _______________________________________________ > CentOS-devel mailing list > CentOS-devel at centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel > Hi Joe, The ruby:2.6 stream is new in RHEL 8.1. We're in the middle of doing the CentOS Stream 8 and CentOS Linux 8.1.1911 releases that will contain this module stream. Our intention is to try to get that module published in the pre-release CR repository (https://wiki.centos.org/AdditionalResources/Repositories/CR) when everything is ready. Modules are a new thing for us, and we're working through if a modularized CR is going to cause trouble or not. --Brian From strigazi at gmail.com Thu Dec 12 10:36:24 2019 From: strigazi at gmail.com (Spyros Trigazis) Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2019 11:36:24 +0100 Subject: [CentOS-devel] Centos Atomic deprecated? In-Reply-To: <1574791202110.81860@Cord3Inc.com> References: <6a955c2b-ce66-b1e1-dcac-8d806038d93a@bachelot.org> <2ad3f5c0-753e-9be8-0dc6-f60faaad0fbd@googlemail.com> <1571399599063.15773@Cord3Inc.com> <29ccd5c2-1bf6-a310-5362-d8c2a493bbb3@centos.org> <1571404277663.71225@Cord3Inc.com> <1574159017236.41490@Cord3Inc.com> <1574446346126.54801@Cord3Inc.com> <8d2fb8a8-3980-d828-ab18-d9e23bbd0c82@cern.ch> <1574766529691.86983@Cord3Inc.com> <556a6aba-21db-44cc-a242-df49927f73c3@Spark> <1574791202110.81860@Cord3Inc.com> Message-ID: Hello, Centos will receive updates full updates up to Q4 2020 and maintenance up to 2024 [0]. What about Centos Atomic? Until when will we have builds? IMO it would make more sense to build centos atomic 8 but as mentioned above this would be something new entirely. Thanks, Spyros [0] https://wiki.centos.org/About/Product On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 7:00 PM Dan Seguin wrote: > Thanks for that, but Kerbunetes is not desired, in fact, it is not wanted. > > I'll save it for future reference. > > Cheers. > ________________________________________ > From: CentOS-devel on behalf of Jason > Brooks > Sent: November 26, 2019 12:24 PM > To: The CentOS developers mailing list. > Subject: Re: [CentOS-devel] Centos Atomic deprecated? > > On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 8:44 AM Gleidson Nascimento > wrote: > > > > Being part of CentOS PaaS SIG, and seeing OKD v4 taking shape, I offer > my time to assist in moving towards coreos assembler, or to help in any > other way the community proposes. > > > > As soon as we have an equivalent of coreos on CentOS, we will be able to > begin our work to release OKD v4. Therefore, this conversation is of our > interest. > > There's a preview release of OKD 4 out: > https://github.com/openshift/okd/blob/master/README.md > > They're using Fedora CoreOS for it. > > > > > Probably we will need to form a SIG to investigate this, if one wasn?t > already formed. > > > > Thanks, > > Gleidson > > On 27 Nov 2019, 12:09 AM +1300, Dan Seguin , > wrote: > > > > Whatever you or I find, I will share and help. As I mentioned before, > Centos 7 ATomic has huge broken tooling for re-spins. Lorax is lacking for > C7. *cough* anaconda updates *cough* And many Lorax changes... > > > > Would *love* to move to Assembler as Jason told me so long ago.... > > > > Dan > > ________________________________________ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > CentOS-devel mailing list > > CentOS-devel at centos.org > > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel > > > > -- > Jason Brooks > Community Architects & Infrastructure > Red Hat Open Source Program Office (OSPO) > https://community.redhat.com | https://osci.io > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS-devel mailing list > CentOS-devel at centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel > _______________________________________________ > CentOS-devel mailing list > CentOS-devel at centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From matt.dees at netprotect.com Thu Dec 12 20:03:13 2019 From: matt.dees at netprotect.com (Matt Dees) Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2019 12:03:13 -0800 Subject: [CentOS-devel] Backport of xfrm kernel bugfix Message-ID: Hi All! We have been dealing with a memory leak in the kernel for IKEv2 and IPSec connections relating to a memory leak in xfrm support on both el8 and el7. The symptom of this issue is that memory will continue allocating in slab over time making a box oom after too many connections. As per some external discussions I am sending the patch + bug report on to this list. It has already been accepted into upstream kernels (4.19 included) and is a pretty straight forward backport. I have tested and installed this on a few centos8 systems to validate that this does indeed solve the memory leak issue. rbz# 1780470 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: xfrm_fix_memleak.patch Type: text/x-patch Size: 1354 bytes Desc: not available URL: From riehecky at fnal.gov Thu Dec 12 20:22:07 2019 From: riehecky at fnal.gov (Pat Riehecky) Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2019 14:22:07 -0600 Subject: [CentOS-devel] Backport of xfrm kernel bugfix In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <610a7408-c026-b7d6-b114-15e1c67c7e39@fnal.gov> Can you open a ticket at https://bugs.centos.org/main_page.php ? On 12/12/19 2:03 PM, Matt Dees wrote: > Hi All! > > We have been dealing?with?a memory leak in the kernel for IKEv2 and > IPSec connections relating to a memory leak in xfrm support on both > el8 and el7. The symptom?of this issue is that memory will continue > allocating in slab over time making a box oom?after too many connections. > > As per some external discussions?I am sending the patch?+ bug report > on to this list. It has already been accepted into upstream kernels > (4.19 included) and is a pretty straight forward backport. I have > tested and installed this on a few centos8 systems to validate that > this does indeed solve the memory leak issue. > > rbz#?1780470 > > > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS-devel mailing list > CentOS-devel at centos.org > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.centos.org_mailman_listinfo_centos-2Ddevel&d=DwICAg&c=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA&r=OAMtP0DWou0nlXG7Kmxo2enjXJfwb1DXS9fwcaESuTE&m=saKpAELEHCBOI8osWTM5BB10VLb8AkhDrCbaZcDQc4g&s=3S9uaZeqZkMHbLszrGxDeSbeplIPTVHDH9fLr9HGMrc&e= -- Pat Riehecky Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory www.fnal.gov www.scientificlinux.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kwade at redhat.com Fri Dec 13 18:34:34 2019 From: kwade at redhat.com (Karsten Wade) Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2019 13:34:34 -0500 Subject: [CentOS-devel] Agenda for CentOS Board of Directors meeting for 2019-12-13 Message-ID: <153d79c2-4e89-c165-01e2-5a15150e7bbb@redhat.com> On Wednesday 18 December 2019, the CentOS Board of Directors will hold it's last meeting of the 2019 calendar year. Below is the agenda for that meeting that can be shared with the community and wider public. FYI, the "consent agenda" are items that have been discussed on mailing list or another forum where the Directors have reached consensus. This consent agenda is a way to capture and formalize those decisions, and to give Directors a final chance to bring an item up for discussion in a meeting before the decision is final. ** *Public agenda* *** 1. Looking at if Community Platform Engineering (CPE) can begin to build and release CentOS Linux 8 and CentOS Stream into various public clouds. 2. Review of signing and release solutions for SIGs in the new year. 3. Rolling (last from 2019-11-13): 1. Any other topics aka ?What other things do you want on our key initiatives list for 2020?? 2. 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 3. Looking at new Board membership and structure (ongoing) 4. Stepping-up our meeting norms (ongoing) 5. Transparency initiatives (ongoing) Public agenda consent items 1. Secretary role revitalized -- not formally in the governance yet, role is delegated meeting organization duties from the Chair to include calling for meetings, managing the private and public agenda for meetings, and handling the creation and release of private and public minutes. Karsten has volunteered to take this role until approximately June 2020. 2. Board intending to confirm support for planning a shift to sharing auth backends with the Fedora Project. * -- 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 From kwade at redhat.com Fri Dec 13 19:03:53 2019 From: kwade at redhat.com (Karsten Wade) Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2019 14:03:53 -0500 Subject: [CentOS-devel] Minutes for CentOS Board of Directors 2019-11-13 Meeting In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Patrick, Sorry I missed this before, just found the discussion when working on the current agenda. I'll be sure to watch more carefully in the future, part of the reason for sending to this list is to have these discussions. Rest of my lengthy answers inline below: On 11/27/19 9:34 AM, Patrick Laimbock wrote: > That's great news. Will the process be similar to how it's done in the Fedora Project [1]? So with a public list of nominees, published interview with each nominee and public voting results? Is there a way for the Community to (self-)nominate? Jim already gave a succinct answer, but I thought you might be interested in my complete response. The short metaphorical answer is, where it comes to good transparency, the Board is just learning to crawl. As much as we want to begin working toward a marathon, we know we need to get through to learning to walk first. In order to be successful at what you describe, we need more time as an active and proper open source project. Fedora Project existed for many years with a high standard of transparency before the original Fedora Board was created. It then started as a blend of appointed (like me!) and elected Board members. Having been through that evolution, I have an intimate idea of how much longer it can take and more complex it can be than the ideal of e.g. starting from scratch with a new project. By comparison, my reckoning is the CentOS Project only began to act like a proper open source project around the time the Virt SIG was created to support the Xen kernel. Of course, the joining of forces with Red Hat was at the core an effort to create a contributor-centric project but primarily around the SIGs; we left other parts e.g. core Linux building alone as "don't break". Not forever, but for a while, and now that five yeas has passed, it's more than time to improve those parts, too. We've built on that plan with SIGs so now it is possible to contribute to a sizeable part of the project. But with the mix of legacy infrastructure, technical and governance debt from the last 7+ years, and the changing needs of a contributor base ... Frankly IMO, today we do not have a large enough community of leaders who could be nominated, nor a mature enough contributor base to hold voting. This is largely the fault of the existing leadership, specifically those of us on the Board of Directors. Lack of transparency and lack of focus on growing leaders I think are at the core of that situation. People have stepped up and tried, and not been enabled or supported as well as they could have been. The project has definitely been moving toward better transparency, to the point where the most obvious transparency problems are at the top of the governance. So we need a little more time before holding open elections in order to realize things such as transparency norms, consistent and productive meetings, and clear evolution. > For better Community coverage perhaps CentOS Board related postings could also be sent to the centos-announce and centos mailinglists? I'm a bit on the fence about this because I'm not sure it's on topic for centos@, but maybe it's OK and not much noise to add to that list? What I mean about on-topic is that the Board deals with issues affecting contributors, who themselves are the interaction points with their userbase. If I were an end user of e.g. RDO, I would find it confusing that in addition to RDO leadership there is this group above the Cloud SIG making decisions, should I be worried about them, what is going on, etc. So the norm so far has been to have SIGs communicate with their userbases, including the Core SIG and CentOS Linux users. (Don't be too confused that some of the people in the Core SIG are also Directors; in wearing different hats, we have to be prepared to speak from different authority points.) We can change up that norm, but I think it's worth discussing with the SIG leaders how they want Board communication handled for their userbase. Does that make sense? So for this time I'm just sending to the contributor list and posting on the blog. Let's keep discussing and see if there is a consensus on if and how to include the userbase in this transparency, perhaps as soon as the Jan 2020 meeting. Best regards, - Karsten -- 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 From Tim.Bell at cern.ch Fri Dec 13 19:14:22 2019 From: Tim.Bell at cern.ch (Tim Bell) Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2019 19:14:22 +0000 Subject: [CentOS-devel] Minutes for CentOS Board of Directors 2019-11-13 Meeting In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <126FAF74-C22B-48E1-8BE9-35175E55BA42@cern.ch> Karsten, Thanks for the updates and all of the directors efforts in the direction of more transparency. These initiatives do take time to evolve and from our side, we appreciate the work which is going on. One possible option for the future would be to provide observer status for the board meetings. This would allow interested parties to listen in and follow the activities. My experience of open source project board meetings is that this also helps for those who might be interested to get involved in project governance to understand the discussions (and in some cases determine there are other areas they would prefer to devote their efforts :-) Tim > On 13 Dec 2019, at 20:03, Karsten Wade wrote: > > Hi Patrick, > > Sorry I missed this before, just found the discussion when working on the current agenda. I'll be sure to watch more carefully in the future, part of the reason for sending to this list is to have these discussions. > > Rest of my lengthy answers inline below: > > On 11/27/19 9:34 AM, Patrick Laimbock wrote: >> That's great news. Will the process be similar to how it's done in the Fedora Project [1]? So with a public list of nominees, published interview with each nominee and public voting results? Is there a way for the Community to (self-)nominate? > > Jim already gave a succinct answer, but I thought you might be interested in my complete response. > > The short metaphorical answer is, where it comes to good transparency, the Board is just learning to crawl. As much as we want to begin working toward a marathon, we know we need to get through to learning to walk first. > > In order to be successful at what you describe, we need more time as an active and proper open source project. > > Fedora Project existed for many years with a high standard of transparency before the original Fedora Board was created. It then started as a blend of appointed (like me!) and elected Board members. Having been through that evolution, I have an intimate idea of how much longer it can take and more complex it can be than the ideal of e.g. starting from scratch with a new project. > > By comparison, my reckoning is the CentOS Project only began to act like a proper open source project around the time the Virt SIG was created to support the Xen kernel. Of course, the joining of forces with Red Hat was at the core an effort to create a contributor-centric project but primarily around the SIGs; we left other parts e.g. core Linux building alone as "don't break". Not forever, but for a while, and now that five yeas has passed, it's more than time to improve those parts, too. > > We've built on that plan with SIGs so now it is possible to contribute to a sizeable part of the project. But with the mix of legacy infrastructure, technical and governance debt from the last 7+ years, and the changing needs of a contributor base ... > > Frankly IMO, today we do not have a large enough community of leaders who could be nominated, nor a mature enough contributor base to hold voting. This is largely the fault of the existing leadership, specifically those of us on the Board of Directors. Lack of transparency and lack of focus on growing leaders I think are at the core of that situation. People have stepped up and tried, and not been enabled or supported as well as they could have been. > > The project has definitely been moving toward better transparency, to the point where the most obvious transparency problems are at the top of the governance. > > So we need a little more time before holding open elections in order to realize things such as transparency norms, consistent and productive meetings, and clear evolution. > >> For better Community coverage perhaps CentOS Board related postings could also be sent to the centos-announce and centos mailinglists? > I'm a bit on the fence about this because I'm not sure it's on topic for centos@, but maybe it's OK and not much noise to add to that list? > > What I mean about on-topic is that the Board deals with issues affecting contributors, who themselves are the interaction points with their userbase. If I were an end user of e.g. RDO, I would find it confusing that in addition to RDO leadership there is this group above the Cloud SIG making decisions, should I be worried about them, what is going on, etc. > > So the norm so far has been to have SIGs communicate with their userbases, including the Core SIG and CentOS Linux users. (Don't be too confused that some of the people in the Core SIG are also Directors; in wearing different hats, we have to be prepared to speak from different authority points.) > > We can change up that norm, but I think it's worth discussing with the SIG leaders how they want Board communication handled for their userbase. Does that make sense? > > So for this time I'm just sending to the contributor list and posting on the blog. Let's keep discussing and see if there is a consensus on if and how to include the userbase in this transparency, perhaps as soon as the Jan 2020 meeting. > > Best regards, > > - Karsten > > -- > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS-devel mailing list > CentOS-devel at centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel From rbowen at redhat.com Fri Dec 13 19:20:30 2019 From: rbowen at redhat.com (Rich Bowen) Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2019 14:20:30 -0500 Subject: [CentOS-devel] Minutes for CentOS Board of Directors 2019-11-13 Meeting In-Reply-To: <126FAF74-C22B-48E1-8BE9-35175E55BA42@cern.ch> References: <126FAF74-C22B-48E1-8BE9-35175E55BA42@cern.ch> Message-ID: On Fri, Dec 13, 2019, 14:14 Tim Bell wrote: > Karsten, > > Thanks for the updates and all of the directors efforts in the direction > of more transparency. These initiatives do take time to evolve and from our > side, we appreciate the work which is going on. > > One possible option for the future would be to provide observer status for > the board meetings. This would allow interested parties to listen in and > follow the activities. My experience of open source project board meetings > is that this also helps for those who might be interested to get involved > in project governance to understand the discussions (and in some cases > determine there are other areas they would prefer to devote their efforts > :-) > +1 to observers. And thank you to the board for having these hard conversations about transparency, and being willing to admit past failings and move forward boldly. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amoloney at redhat.com Fri Dec 13 19:42:35 2019 From: amoloney at redhat.com (Aoife Moloney) Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2019 19:42:35 +0000 Subject: [CentOS-devel] CPE Weekly: 2019-12-13 Message-ID: Hi everyone, Welcome to the CPE team weekly project update mail! Background: The Community Platform Engineering group is the Red Hat team combining IT and release engineering from Fedora and CentOS. Our goal is to keep core servers and services running and maintained, build releases, and other strategic tasks that need more dedicated time than volunteers can give. For better communication, we will be giving weekly reports to the CentOS and Fedora communities about the general tasks and work being done. Also for better communication between our groups we have created #redhat-cpe on Freenode IRC! Please feel free to catch us there, a mail has landed on both the CentOS and Fedora devel lists with context here. Note: This document is currently built from individual reports rolled into a document which we edit and copy into a final document. We are aware that this causes problems with some email readers, and are working on a method to make this less problematic. High Level Project Updates: CentOS Wiki.centos.org migration (last monday) Finishing templates for mailman ansible role (new look with community members) Preparing the next migration (sponsor relocates DC and new machines): www.centos.org (on track, to be announced) Forums (scheduled for next monday) Starting new ansible roles to automate deploy + upgrade of those migrated services Working on koji (cbs.dev) to see when we can import 8.1 content to let SIGs build against/for .el8 and .el8s (Stream) Collaborating with Artwork SIG for new design for http exposed services (new centos design) QA for 8-Stream and 8.1.1911 continues Fedora Production issues with Bodhi: Bodhi is under investigation for misbehaving. Creating update can take a long time or just fail. The status can be tracked here https://status.fedoraproject.org/ Rawhide Gating Fixed: https://pagure.io/fedora-ci/general/issue/70 repoSpanner This has been turned off on Fedora side except for src.stg.fedoraproject.org The team are now working on whether to convert src.stg or redeploy Pagure Updates Pagure 5.8.1 has been released Pagure 5.8.1 has been pushed to staging & production Pagure-dist-git 1.5.1 and 1.5.2 has been released Pagure-dist-git 1.5.1 has been pushed to staging Pagure and 1.5.2 has been pushed to staging & production Fedora Docs Updates Merges: https://pagure.io/fedora-docs/quick-docs/pull-request/166 https://pagure.io/fedora-docs/quick-docs/pull-request/161 https://pagure.io/fedora-docs/quick-docs/pull-request/159 Fedora docs was published to localization stats to stage Community Fires Team Made the side-tag workflow work in stable releases Fixed the distgit-bugzilla-sync script New pagure and pagure-dist-git have been released and deployed Fix showing CI results on PR on dist-git Added a new API endpoint to Pagure to install and remove git hook Tiger Team Updates: OSBS Sprint focused on getting the aarch64 VMs in staging Deployed Fedora 30 on the VMs and started deploying OpenShift Currently blocked by the authentication to quay.io to get the aarch64 images. Focus for the next sprint is to have a working OpenShift on the aarch64 hardware. Bodhi CD Ability to build a docker image in quay.io on a push to github branch Ability to trigger a redeploy in openshift automatically after image has been rebuilt in quay Upgrade the database schema automatically with openshift deployment, instead of manually running ansible playbooks Application Retirements Elections Everything should be ready now to move Elections to Communishift Planning will start soon for a move date! Fedocal No progress on kanban board last seven weeks - looks abandoned https://teams.fedoraproject.org/project/fedora-calendar/kanban Jlanda?s permission error in communishift should be fixed now https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/8274 Another permission issue occurred during test Nuancier Benson Muite is now working on OIDC authentication The team have recommended to create a PR on Github to be able to see the progress PR from sebwoj - Porting to Fedora messaging Sebwoj is now working on adding scheme as part of the PR EPEL 8 Modularity EPEL 8 Modularity work tested in stage and was deployed to production on Tuesday 10th December EPEL 8 Playground Modularity work is on hold. Blocker: https://pagure.io/fm-orchestrator/issue/1541 Misc Updates Tests to jms-messaging plugin are now successfully running & waiting for review Buildvmhost-01/02/03/04 has been reinstalled with rhel8 Buildvm-01 to 32 has been reinstalled Autocloud has been decommissioned ppc9-02 has been reinstalled with f31, and buildvm-ppc64le-01 to 09 ppc8-01 has been reinstalled with rhel8 F29 signed builds, updates, updates-testing, container, cloud composes in /mnt/koji/composes were cleaned up this week Holiday Season Shutdown Notices: Red Hat does a 2 week end of year shutdown where nearly everyone is encouraged to spend time away from computers and family. During that time, some operators will be monitoring tickets and services for large scale outages, but will not be active on IRC or email. The ability of the operators to fix problems is also limited because some operations require staff who will be away. People on duty will do what they can to repair and maintain services but do not give any ETA on how long it will take for it to be done. If you are making changes to infrastructure during this time, please treat it like a ?frozen? period. Unless it is an emergency repair, do not push changes without a review from a main system administrator. We would encourage you to bump your ticket or request early in the New Year (full service resumes January 6th) for our attention, otherwise we will work through the backlog of requests. We wish you and yours a happy holiday season and look forward to working with you in collaboration throughout 2020 and beyond. Comments? Suggestions? Feedback? Let Us Know! Kindest regards, Aoife -- Aoife Moloney Feature Driver Community Platform Engineering Team Red Hat EMEA Communications House Cork Road Waterford From kwade at redhat.com Fri Dec 13 21:56:36 2019 From: kwade at redhat.com (Karsten Wade) Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2019 16:56:36 -0500 Subject: [CentOS-devel] Minutes for CentOS Board of Directors 2019-11-13 Meeting In-Reply-To: <126FAF74-C22B-48E1-8BE9-35175E55BA42@cern.ch> References: <126FAF74-C22B-48E1-8BE9-35175E55BA42@cern.ch> Message-ID: On 12/13/19 2:14 PM, Tim Bell wrote: > One possible option for the future would be to provide observer status for the board meetings. This would allow interested parties to listen in and follow the activities. My experience of open source project board meetings is that this also helps for those who might be interested to get involved in project governance to understand the discussions (and in some cases determine there are other areas they would prefer to devote their efforts:-) Hi Tim As it happens, Rich Bowen and I have been talking through an idea for something like an advisory council that would be involved in discussions during a portion of a Board meeting, for much the similar purpose you describe. This is an idea that has come up a few times from various Directors over the last several years. The item didn't make it on the Dec agenda because we're still working up the proposal; I think Jan is likely. My plan is to put out the proposal here prior to the meeting to get some initial feedback on how it's structured and would begin. My personal thinking is to follow the iterative opening-up method -- start with an invited group of people in a closed but public agenda/minutes session; do that for a period of time such as 6 months; then see when we might transition to adding more ways to observe in real time or via recording. This is all about balancing the needs of the various stakeholders, which range from small to large end users, upstream projects dependent on CentOS in various ways, Red Hat engineering and product groups that work upstream and downstream from CentOS, the various SIGs, ISVs, IHVs, and all their network of relationships, and so forth. Out of simplicity and an abundance of caution we got this? started on a private-only track 6 years ago, and deeply appreciate the patience of folks as we untangle old and present needs into better leadership. Best, - Karsten -- 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