Re: F39 Proposal: Make Toolbx a release-blocking deliverable and have release-blocking test criteria (System-Wide Change)

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

 



On 5/9/23 07:53, Stephen Smoogen wrote:
> On Mon, 8 May 2023 at 19:35, Demi Marie Obenour <demiobenour@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> 
>> On 5/8/23 19:09, Neal Gompa wrote:
>>> On Mon, May 8, 2023 at 7:05 PM Demi Marie Obenour <demiobenour@xxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 5/8/23 18:49, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, May 08, 2023 at 09:29:02PM +0100, Sebastian Crane wrote:
>>>>>> Dear Kevin,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hmm, quoting from https://pagure.io/releng/issue/11092:
>>>>>>>>>> Also the aarch64 cluster is running on Fedora 33 boxes, so we
>>>>>>>>>> should probably try to do a full redeploy :-(
>>>>>>>>> We can't upgrade it from f33 because docker is no longer in f34+
>> and
>>>>>>>>> openshift origin / 3.11 doesn't support any newer either.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Is this still true? I don't think we want to make the Fedora release
>>>>>>>> process contingent on something that requires F33.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> yes, it's still true. Note thats the aarch64 osbs cluster.
>>>>>>> The x86_64 one is rhel7.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Might it be possible to replace Docker with CRI-O on the OpenShift
>>>>>> cluster?
>>>>>
>>>>> Nope. openshift 3 / osbs1 uses docker. :(
>>>>>
>>>>> kevin
>>>>
>>>> alias docker=podman
>>>
>>> Using Podman with it through Podman's implementation of the Docker
>>> Host protocol *may* work, but a version of Podman that has it is not
>>> currently available for RHEL 7 (which is what OpenShift 3.11 runs on).
>>
>> Time for an OpenShift upgrade?
>>
>>
> I realize people are trying to help with suggestions, but the problem is
> that this is not a simple solution or it would have been done years ago.
> 
> The Fedora Build System is a very complicated set of applications all tied
> together with custom scripting, schema, and various updates over time.
> There are somewhere around 40 core services and 30 more subsidiary ones
> which need to be continually working to allow for the daily builds for
> multiple releases. Many of those services have been added in at different
> times with different operating systems and rules. In order to work with
> each other a lot of 'glue' scripting, libraries and such are needed.
> 
> You upgrade podman/docker in one section and you find that the message bus
> isn't sending in another because an API call isn't there anymore. You try
> putting in something which says it has a koji plugin and you find it
> doesn't work with our koji and then you need to extend the plugin 40 ways
> to work with bodhi, pdc, fedmsg and fedora-messaging, and a dozen other
> things which all are the actual build system. Once those get fixed, you
> find that it is now causing other glue parts to fail in odd ways no one
> remembers why without some archaeological coding.

Having ancient versions of OpenShift is almost certainly a security problem.
If there is stuff that cannot be kept on a supported version it should be
removed.

> When dealing with the Build system side of things there is currently 1
> senior system administrator and 1 senior release engineer. There are some
> volunteers who can work on subparts but mainly have day jobs doing other
> things. Looking at IRC, most of the 10-12 hour work day is dealing with
> compose problems, build issues, hardware failures, and similar things. Most
> of the 40 component subsystems like the Open Shift Build System (OSBS) are
> brought in by a dedicated team who have a budget time to get it working and
> into place. Once that time is done, any fixes are on the Fedora staff or
> working with available time from whatever team.

This is the actual problem IMO.  What will it take to fix it?

> tl;dr: The Fedora Build System is in total a very complicated set of tools
> where changing or upgrading any one part tends to cascade to fixing lots of
> glue throughout the system. Instead of looking to upgrade things to add
> more deliverables, it may be better to look at other ways to get those
> deliverables built.

Do you mean outside of the Fedora Build System?
-- 
Sincerely,
Demi Marie Obenour (she/her/hers)

Attachment: OpenPGP_0xB288B55FFF9C22C1.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key

Attachment: OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital 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

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux