On Wed Nov 16, 2022 at 08:25 -0500, Dusty Mabe wrote: > On 11/16/22 06:09, Dan Čermák wrote: > > On November 14, 2022 7:18:45 PM UTC, "Timothée Ravier" <siosm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: <snip> > > I'm using docker for $dayjob and would be willing to help out a bit, but I will not be the main maintainer, as I don't feel comfortable taking such a huge package and lack the cycles for that. Yes, the package is complicated :(. It could use some cleanup (see the end of [1]), but I'm trying to step away from the package, and I haven't had time to. [1]: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/message/DMPZRAUO3H5EHOCZDULYORYJVQU2WBIJ/ > I think there are others that would be willing to help mentor you if > you'd be interested in the challenge (with help). The Golang SIG has > regular meetings and various ways to communicate, which might be a > good way to engage: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Go That's true. Our next meeting is the 21st at 19:00 UTC in #fedora-golang. As always, anybody is welcome to attend :). > >> This notably impacts Fedora CoreOS as we are including the moby-engine package by default to let users pick their container engine of choice whithout deciding for them in advance. We offer both major container engines by default in the image (podman and moby-engine). > > > > No offense, but this sounds like that this is something the Fedora coreos team should tackle. Given that Fedora coreos appears to be driven to a large extend by redhat (at least that's my impression, please correct me if I'm wrong), I find it a bit odd that the business is asking volunteers to step up to help the business out... > > No offense taken. This is a great opportunity to add some clarity. Red Hat > doesn't ship Docker in products any longer. It was dropped in RHEL8+: > https://access.redhat.com/solutions/3696691 Yes, Docker and Containerd are no longer Supported in RHEL, but that's besides the point here. Fedora CoreOS ships moby-engine. The CoreOS Working Group apparently care about moby-engine and want it to be included in FCOS. I picked up on this and asked if they'd be willing to help maintain it. The two developers involved (who are paid by RH to work on FCOS) made clear that they are uninterested in doing so[^1] and took it upon themselves to find a volunteer to maintain the package. We got more contributions from an outside contributor who wasn't a package maintainer (3 PRs which involved rebasing patches, updating dependencies, and diagnosing build failures) than the FCOS team (0 PRs, 5 pings on their issue tracker and IRC, this email). I'm not trying to cause unnecessary strife here and they have apologized, but I'd be dishonest if I said I wasn't disappointed with the way this situation was handled. [^1]: which is alright. Everyone is free to choose what packages they do or don't want to maintain. -- Maxwell G (@gotmax23) Pronouns: He/Him/His
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-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/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
