From Fedora Project Wiki
No edit summary |
|||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
= How We Prioritize = | |||
* Atomic stakeholder meetings - http://etherpad.corp.redhat.com/FedoraAtomicPriorities | |||
* ... | |||
= Priorities = | |||
== Immediate Priorites == | == Immediate Priorites == |
Revision as of 20:53, 5 October 2015
How We Prioritize
* Atomic stakeholder meetings - http://etherpad.corp.redhat.com/FedoraAtomicPriorities * ...
Priorities
Immediate Priorites
* 2 week Atomic content * Documented policy and process for contributing to upstream tools * Design Only: Re-design atomic release process (to include compose based testing, something closer to continuous releases, alignment with internal process) * Immediate Sigul support * 2 week Atomic improvements * Documentation of rel-eng process so that internal release engineers can contribute
F24 Commitments
* PDC deployed & populated with product / release data * Pungi 4 upgrade and Pungi roadmap * Layered image builds * Move to livemedia-creator for live cds * Content signing can be automated through Sigul or another tool
Backlog
* Docker images can be built in Oz / ImageFactory for all supported arches * Atomic redesigned workflow & toolchain * Consolidate hubs for primary and secondaryl arches * Simplification of compose process and toolchain * RHEL process checks done internally that should also be done in Fedora (ie license checking, rpmdiff / static analysis, etc) * Taskotron * Koji 2.0 * ET / Bodhi alignment * RHEL.next support * Any opportunities for leveraging Level 1 support * rel-eng scripts cleanup * rel-eng tools are not easily testable or contributed to * changes can be tested in an integrated environment before releasing to production * Integration with gilmsg where appropriate in release tooling