On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 09:02:18AM -0400, Máirín Duffy wrote: > To help fill out some of the needed context here that I'm not seeing > on the wiki page [1] I have some questions - Thanks. Questions are good. > 1) Is the main rationale behind removing atomic from getfedora.org > and separating it out into its own site that the release cycle is > much more rapid? When we originally discussed separating Fedora out > into editions, one of the rationales was that each edition could > potentially have a different release cycle. Has something behind > that changed? > > 2) How does this change the relationship between the Fedora Cloud > edition and the Fedora atomic images, if at all? What is the overall > Fedora Cloud Edition story in having some components available on > getfedora.org and some on a separate site (atomic.fpo)? Is atomic > being distanced from the Fedora Cloud edition / no longer part of > it? I think these two are basically different aspects of the same question. The answer to the second part is "it moves Atomic out of Fedora Cloud Edition, at least for now", and I think that answers the first question at least in part. See <https://fedorahosted.org/cloud/ticket/96> for some background. Basically, Fedora Cloud is going to focus on the more traditional base image (and hopefully on enabling various language stacks on top of that). My basic mental model here is that the Fedora Atomic Host is something like a Spin rather than an Edition, except different from the normal expectations for Spins, too — and definitely doesn't fit into the shiny new Spins page, which focuses on alternate desktop environments. And it doesn't seem fit into the Labs model either, since it doesn't have featured applications (unless you count the "atomic" command). So, that's why I was thinking "whole new page". > 3) Stepping back from even the specifics of the Fedora Cloud edition > story in particular - are we separating "cloud" from "containers" > somehow here? For users coming to Fedora with an interest in cloud, > is atomic.fpo going to be something they will want to know about? > For users coming to Fedora with an interest in containers, is Fedora > Cloud Edition (non atomic images) something of interest to them? Are > they going to be confused picking up docker images from > getfedora.org and atomic images from atomic.fpo? In order: maybe (and that's possibly problematic), yes, yes, and I hope not. I'm definitely willing to reconsider this, and I think the Cloud SIG would be open to consideration too — we could scrap basically everything I said for your #1 and #2 and fit this into <https://getfedora.org/en/cloud/download/atomic.html> > 4) Would Docker images continue to live on getfedora.org/cloud? Bear with me a minute here for some exposition. :) There are fundamentally two kinds of Docker images: base images, and layered images. Base images are created outside of Docker and are the underlying building blocks. Layered images are derived from those base images, using a Dockerfile to add additional content and configuration. Right now, we produce official base images, and layered images are somewhat in limbo — we produce Dockerfiles which can be used to making layered images as part of the fedora-docker package, but don't have any real mechanism for building the layered images officially. That's planned to change with <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Layered_Docker_Image_Build_Service> — this is the same tech Red Hat is using internally, and we're working to bring it into the open. The resulting layered images will be, in some ways, very like RPMs — although they're in fact constructed from RPMs, each one has a name-epoch-version-release, and we'll track contents for security updates and etc. So.... what's the relevance here? Basically, like individual RPMs, these aren't something we really want a download page for. They're, instead, something you obtain/launch with the atomic or docker commands, just like you'd obtain RPMs with DNF or applications with GNOME Software. However, in order to get to that future vision, we need the layered build service change, *and* a future change where we run our own registry (or else an agreement to make the upstream Docker hub our official distribution system). So that's some way off, and in the meantime, we need a place to present that. I don't know what the right answer is, honestly. > 5) Do you want cross-referencing between the sites, eg getfedora.org > references atomic.fpo (I'm guessing on getfedora.org/cloud?? and > maybe in the footer?) and atomic.fpo references getfedora.org (i'm > guessing to getfedora.org/cloud??) Yes, I think so. > I probably have a lot more questions but they'd depend on the above answers. Thanks :) -- Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Fedora Project Leader -- websites mailing list websites@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/websites
