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.

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...

3) Looking backward at Fedora 20 support missing, I think we should also start building on Fedora Rawhide

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