Re: thoughts while looking at logwatch

From: "Sandro Bonazzola" <sbonazzo(a)redhat.com&gt; To: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com&gt;, "infra" <infra(a)ovirt.org&gt;, "Brian Proffitt" <bproffit(a)redhat.com&gt; Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2014 8:12:47 AM Subject: Re: thoughts while looking at logwatch Il 25/02/2014 13:59, Itamar Heim ha scritto: > On 02/25/2014 02:42 PM, Sandro Bonazzola wrote: >> I think they may have passed unnoticed so let me resume here what I wrote >> in a previous email. >> >> 1) we should make it more clear on the website which version of Fedora are >> supported. We still have people trying to download oVirt 3.3 stable on >> Fedora 12, 15, 16 and 18. > > brian --^ > >> >> 2) It seems that we should also start building epel7 packages: >> Fedora already started: >> http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/beta/7/x86_64/repoview/ >> And centos has a build: >> http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-build-reports/2014-January/00000... > > +1 for .el7 builds. > >> >> 3) Looking backward at Fedora 20 support missing, I think we should also >> start building on Fedora Rawhide >> > > the problem is the minute it breaks (could be us, could be fedora), its > broken till fixed, which may take a while, so further regressions can > happen. > for example, fedora 20 comes with wildfly (aka jboss-as-8), which isn't > something trivial to fix (without breaking jboss-as-7 support). I'm not saying we should rely on having Rawhide working. I'm saying that would be useful have a warning when it's not working so we can take a look and see if we're diverging from Rawhide. Maybe we can sync with Fedora Virtualization SIG on this, they may help us as we help them discovering issues on Rawhide. > > i wonder if we shouldn't skip f20 and aim for f21 by now... +1 for Fedora 21 - oVirt 3.5.0 skipping f20 for < 3.5.0 -- Sandro Bonazzola Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration. See how it works at redhat.com