On 04/12/2017 10:49 AM, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 10:46 AM, Pierre-Yves Chibon > <pingou@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 10:18:33AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: >>> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 10:14 AM, Matthew Miller >>> <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 12:37:47PM +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: >>>>> I have put together a wiki page making this a change proposal: >>>>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/FedoraAtomicCI >>>> >>>> I'd actually like to escalate this from a Change proposal (which >>>> generally fit into Fedora releases) to a Council-level project >>>> Objective. That basically means rename to >>>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Objective/FedoraAtomicCI and file a >>>> council ticket. :) >>>> >>> >>> Why call this "Atomic CI"? Can't we call this something better that >>> reflects that it would be beneficial for the entire distribution, >>> rather than a small subset of Fedorans working in Project Atomic? >> >> The idea is to start with something that has a limited impact, I believe the >> idea is to build up the pipeline in such a way that it can scale to the entire >> distribution, but we need to start somewhere and Atomic Host is a deliverable in >> itself and as a small set of packages making it easier to control and experiment >> with. >> Does that make sense? >> > > Sure, it does, but if this becomes an actual aspect of Fedora, as > Matthew Miller wants (and it makes sense), then it makes little > sense to call the thing Atomic CI. Instead CI for Atomic would > be the first goal, but the overall aim is for the whole distribution. > +1 - The overall effort should be called something more generic, where the first stage is to implement for atomic host. Dusty _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
