[Gluster-infra] [Gluster-Maintainers] [gluster-packaging] Fwd: [CentOS-devel] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Michael Scherer]

Le jeudi 10 décembre 2020 à 22:06 +0530, sankarshan a écrit :
> What is your recommendation? As in, the next steps from here.

- check if there is c8s image on amazon already

if there is one
- switch the image and reinstall the builders (3rd time this week, so I
should not stumble like the previous 2)

if not
- install centos8-stream-release rpm, dnf upgrade -y, reboot
- add the rpm in ansible so it will be here if we reinstall
- wait for a proper ec2 image and add it to ansible

Given we had kernel bugs in the past (
https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues/1402#issuecomment-666358241
 ), I think  faster access to fixes for the CI (or even for production)
is a good idea.


On Thu, 10 Dec 2020 at 21:28, Michael Scherer <mscherer at redhat.com>
> wrote:
> > 
> > Le jeudi 10 décembre 2020 à 21:14 +0530, sankarshan a écrit :
> > > There are 2 specific bits which I expected to stimulate in
> > > discussion
> > > 
> > > [1] a review by the Gluster Infrastructure team in terms of
> > > whether
> > > there is any change in the processes/environment
> > 
> > I was about to ask. For now, we run C8 almost nowhere, except 2
> > builders.
> > 
> > I pondered between switching both of them to C8s, or reinstall 2 on
> > C8s
> > and keep 2 on C8, to compare.
> > 
> > I do not expect disruptive change on c8s that wouldn't already
> > happen
> > on c8 with a minor version, so I am ok to just switch, I just do
> > not
> > have any Centos 8 to test.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > [2] whether the maintainers will consider reviewing this in
> > > entirety
> > > and be able to assess the impact
> > > 
> > > To my knowledge this topic was not previously brought up at any
> > > of
> > > the
> > > Gluster meetings, so it is worth requesting all parties involved
> > > to
> > > take a moment to form their opinions and use appropriate forums
> > > to
> > > discuss that.
> > > 
> > > On Wed, 9 Dec 2020 at 14:04, Niels de Vos <ndevos at redhat.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 09:00:35PM +0530, sankarshan wrote:
> > > > > FYI. Would likely be important in context of packaging,
> > > > > testing
> > > > > and
> > > > > release content
> > > > 
> > > > Indeed, we currently build packages in the CentOS Storage SIG
> > > > against
> > > > CentOS Linux, and not against CentOS Stream. But other than
> > > > that, I
> > > > do
> > > > not expect major visible changes for our users.
> > > > 
> > > > The main advantage is that we can more directly contribute to
> > > > the
> > > > distribution. CentOS Stream allows us to send PRs that get
> > > > reviewed
> > > > by
> > > > Red Hat Enterprise Linux developers and potentially get
> > > > included.  That
> > > > means, enhancements to FUSE or other components do not need to
> > > > rely
> > > > on
> > > > the work Red Hat is planning, but could be worked on by our
> > > > community
> > > > and get included earlier.
> > > > 
> > > > If there are any concerns, I'd love to hear about it.
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Niels
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > --
> > Michael Scherer / He/Il/Er/Él
> > Sysadmin, Community Infrastructure
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
-- 
Michael Scherer / He/Il/Er/Él
Sysadmin, Community Infrastructure



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-infra/attachments/20201210/cacb89b2/attachment.sig>