rbowen / centos / board

Forked from centos/board 3 years ago
Clone

Blame meetings/2018/2018-02-21.md

09118c
Attendees:
09118c
Karanbir Singh
09118c
Jim Perrin
09118c
Fabian Arrotin
09118c
Johnny Hughes
09118c
Ralph Angenendt
09118c
Karsten Wade
09118c
09118c
Actions:
09118c
Add a license field for every container entry
09118c
Develop list of all licenses in the distro + per repo
09118c
Add requirements for license field into the SIG guide
09118c
Add verification check
09118c
Messaging for unified git
09118c
Write up proposal & submit to Board for discussion / approval
09118c
09118c
09118c
Notes:
09118c
Registry.centos.org containers
09118c
Who is vetting that things match the correct rules?
09118c
Akin to SIGs -- they can go succeed but following the guidelines
09118c
Need guidelines for this
09118c
Containers may be more visible than other domains
09118c
Licensing guidelines are already in https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup
09118c
What is our response?
09118c
Containers are acting separately from what SIGs do?
09118c
Operate within Atomic SIG
09118c
Who is responsible for content going into registry?
09118c
BamaChrn Kundu & Container Eng team
09118c
Action: Need a ‘License:’ field for every container entry
09118c
Action: Make sure it is in the SIG guide & referenced from that SIG
09118c
What do we put in the license field?
09118c
License field should contain the license for the app that is the ‘purpose’ of the container
09118c
All licenses need to be included in the container viewable when examining the container
09118c
Make it clear to the SIGs what we are happy to host/not host
09118c
Issue of how we build containers
09118c
LIfecycle terms
09118c
OK to just consume content
09118c
Can take built binaries …
09118c
Requiring restriction to come from RPMs would be a very high barrier for the upstreams we are working from
09118c
Licenses we approve of …
09118c
Verification check post-build?
09118c
If we’re not checking / don’t have a way to check, we’re responsible.
09118c
Unified git (NDA topic)
09118c
Discussed at FOSDEM
09118c
Buildroot for RHEL8 likely larger than shipped OS
09118c
All source coming into CentOS
09118c
To make this work with need a unified git with Fedora
09118c
Result
09118c
Git.centos.org maintained by us, pulls from common place as git.fedoraproject.org
09118c
Effects
09118c
No appreciable negative effects?
09118c
Positive for certain type of maintainers
09118c
Makes our future lives easier as stuff is changing anyway
09118c
Modified packages
09118c
How is this going to work if CentOS & Fedora have a common upstream git repo -- where do our changes go?
09118c
Different branches - ‘f’ v ‘c’, so each group/hat worn pushes changes to their branches
09118c
Some packagers may wear both hats
09118c
How are the CentOS changes retained?
09118c
The official branches ‘c7’ are for debranding only -- workflow stays in place.
09118c
Johnny’s changes go through as they do currently
09118c
We need to be better updating patches in alt-src
09118c
E.g. c7-sig-altarch would be protected for project & SIG members via authentication, so no one from e.g. Fedora could step on something.
09118c
Ideally this is a minimal changes to current workflow
09118c
09118c
09118c
09118c
09118c