On 22.03.22 22:29, Justin Forbes wrote: > On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 1:24 PM Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 08.02.22 20:24, Donald Zickus wrote: >>> >>> It has been awhile since we changed how this mailing list is used. As >>> folks have noticed, we have increased traffic significantly over the >>> past couple of years to reflect the activity Red Hat developers are >>> performing on the Fedora kernel. >>> >>> My question to this list is around the thoughts of this activity: >>> * Is there too much noise? Should we throttle back? >>> * is the volume ok? Folks have good filters? >>> * Other suggestions on how we use this list? >>> >>> Trying to continue to make this mailing list useful. >> >> A mail Prarit Bhargava sent today ( >> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/message/2FCAZG3H3Z65KPEDFXTGPVPIOYRVE322/ >> ) to this list made me get back to this thread: >> >> I'm pretty sure Prarit didn't mean to, but both links in above mail are >> not accessible to outsiders. :-/ And that made me realize something: > > I get that. I mean on the one hand, the original error did occur on > things that not everyone has access to, but for people that did, it > might be more help in figuring out the issue, but the pastebin should > have been on https://pastebin.centos.org/. Even the original issue > can be reproduced outside of the CKI environment, but honestly, I do > understand that the time to reproduce the full output is considerably > longer than a quick reproducer on pastebin. > >> kernel-ark and its mails here often make me feel like I'm back in the >> days of Fedora Core and Extras, where Red Hat does one thing, while the >> community is doing a different thing and having a hard time influencing >> the thing done by Red Hat employees (back then that was because either >> community members had no access or because it required a great deal of >> effort to learn everything and stay on top of things). >> >> I known that this is unfair and inaccurate, as that's not how it is with >> kernel-ark. But nevertheless it often just feels like that to me. > > I was there in those days, not a Red Hat insider, and I can assure you > that kernel-ark is not there. Yeah, I know, that's why I mentioned that my comparison was unfair and inaccurate (I should have used the word "wrong" instead...), but nevertheless it for me kinda feels like that (which at the same time makes me feel bad, because I *know* that it's a unfair feeling). :-/ > There is some additional Red Hat ism due > to the nature of how RHEL is developed, but I have worked pretty hard > to make sure that it doesn't get in the way of actual Fedora kernels. > I am 100% dedicated to Fedora, and while I am a Red Hat employee, it > is very much Fedora first, I don't work on RHEL at all directly, once > it leaves kernel-ark, or in the older days when RHEL branched from > Fedora, I don't have anything to do with it. I know, I know, don't worry, as that is visible from the outside (at least for me); and I'm really grateful for that. IOW: many thx for this! Guess the thing is: for you it's the day job and you where kinda involved when kernel-ark was built. But as a outsider you needs some time to get a hang on things with it, as you needs to learn quite a few things if you want to use it and understand the mails that trickle in from it here. And I guess that leads to the feeling I mentioned, as it reminds me of the "required a great deal of effort to learn everything and stay on top of things" quoted above. I guess I had kinda hoped that kernel-ark would be a bit more like this: * you clone kernel-ark * you apply or revert patches or change a config * you run "make rpm", "make mockbuild" or something like that And thx to some magic after a while get a just a RPM with a vanilla kernel for your arch, the OS you are running (Fedora/CentOS/RHEL) in the kernel flavor you are running currently. Kernel-ark is not that far away from it if you look closer, but OTOH is sometimes feels a lot more complicated -- I for example more than once had to deal with some RHEL specific things I didn't care about when I tried to do something with kernel-ark (maybe that was just bad luck). Also see https://cki-project.gitlab.io/kernel-ark/, which as example uses "cp redhat/configs/<flavor_os>.config .config" – here RHEL is the only example and Fedora not mentioned at all. Small details like this are what contribute to the feeling mentioned above. And FWIW: Justin, I know that you have a lot on your plate already and doing a great job, I don't want to create extra load for you with this mail, but at the same time hope someone will improve these things. Heck, often I wish I had the time to do that, but right now I have other priorities. :-/ > More importantly I feel > like I have the support of management and others when I do push back > because something goes against Fedora's interests. Great! >> Sorry. Maybe that's just me. Anyway: >> >> One thing that IMHO could help a lot to avoid that feeling on my side: >> get rid of all the redhatisms. E.g. rename the redhat/ directory in >> kernel-ark to fcrh/ (short for Fedora, CentOS, Red Hat), rpmification/, >> a combination of those, or something like that -- just not "redhat" (and >> maybe rename kernel-ark at the same time as well). Same for makes >> targets. And make everything feel like kernel-ark is primary a >> Fedora/community thing where CentOS/Red Hat are downstream consumers >> that are closely involved because everyone benefits from it. Ciao, Thorsten _______________________________________________ kernel mailing list -- kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
