Re: new Fedora Atomic sub-site - help wanted

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



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
_______________________________________________
design-team mailing list
design-team@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Music]     [Fedora Development]     [Linux Kernel]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora Directory]     [PAM]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux