15:00:32 #startmeeting Server SIG Weekly Meeting (2016-03-15) 15:00:32 Meeting started Tue Mar 15 15:00:32 2016 UTC. The chair is sgallagh. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:00:32 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 15:00:32 The meeting name has been set to 'server_sig_weekly_meeting_(2016-03-15)' 15:00:32 #meetingname ServerSIG 15:00:32 #chair sgallagh mizmo nirik stefw adamw simo danofsatx mhayden jds2001 15:00:32 #topic roll call 15:00:33 The meeting name has been set to 'serversig' 15:00:33 Current chairs: adamw danofsatx jds2001 mhayden mizmo nirik sgallagh simo stefw 15:00:42 .hello stefw 15:00:43 stefw: stefw 'Stef Walter' 15:00:48 .hello kevin 15:00:49 .hello sgallagh 15:00:49 nirik: kevin 'Kevin Fenzi' 15:00:53 sgallagh: sgallagh 'Stephen Gallagher' 15:01:26 .hello jstanley 15:01:27 jds2001: jstanley 'Jon Stanley' 15:02:29 I hope the DST change doesn't catch too many folks 15:04:24 mizmo sent her regrets on the list 15:05:34 Not looking good for quorum... 15:05:49 .hello simo 15:05:50 simo: simo 'Simo Sorce' 15:06:00 Ah, there we go :) 15:06:21 OK, we have enough people to proceed. 15:06:27 #topic Agenda 15:06:28 #info Agenda Topic: Available Environments on the Server DVD 15:06:28 #info Agenda Topic: Default guided partitioning scheme 15:06:40 Anyone have other topics they'd like listed in the agenda? 15:07:09 .hello adamwill 15:07:10 adamw: adamwill 'Adam Williamson' 15:07:23 status on rolekit redesign? 15:07:40 but that can wait too. 15:07:53 jds2001: Nothing to report at this time. I've been on other tasks and one of the other developers was on vacatino. 15:08:27 #topic Available Environments on the Server DVD 15:09:08 #link https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/server@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/4UGRPRK7J5NCSUW5KO7MDXGY56I446LY/ 15:09:31 This email thread restarted the conversation specifically for QA needs, but it expanded a bit. 15:10:10 There are plans to have the Environment-Currently-Known-As-Minimal be taken over and curated by the renewed Base WG 15:11:00 The current proposal we have on the mailing list is to continue shipping it on the Server DVD, but rename the environment so that it appears as "Fedora Custom Operating System" rather than "Minimal". 15:11:24 (To make it clear that it is *not* Server Edition, despite being installable from our media) 15:11:29 * jds2001 is torn by this. On the one hand, we want to have *some* method of a "choose your own adventure" minimal install in *Fedora*. Is the Server product the right place to deliver that? 15:11:34 probably not. 15:12:15 * nirik is fine with calling it custom if we can easily do that 15:12:20 For the record, the Everything tree produces a netinstall ISO, but I don't think we actually link to it on getfedora.org 15:12:43 nirik: With the new compose process, I *think* it should be rather simple. 15:12:45 sgallagh: ahh, that might be the right place. 15:12:45 well, it's only started doing that in f24. 15:13:03 we didn't used to get a universal netinst for f23 and earlier, which is why we always directed people to the Server netinst. 15:13:10 right 15:13:32 jds2001: that's a netinst, though, no use if you don't have a network, depending on how much we care about that. 15:14:01 adamw: im assuming that most servers have network connections :) 15:14:02 Right, and as noted in that thread, QA *does* have a use-case for this, albeit a potentially-contrived one. 15:14:19 sgallagh: I was kind of working on the assumption that we'd be releasing the Everything netinst as the 'choose-your-own-adventure' consumable, i guess. 15:14:37 My gut tells me that "Minimal" is a starting point, not an end goal, so people will have to pull additional packages from the network anyway. 15:14:40 (we as in Fedora, not we as in Server) 15:15:13 adamw: I don't think there's any official plan for that currently. 15:15:30 Right now, I think it's basically produced as a side-effect of the new compose process, but a potentially-useful one 15:15:32 well, i'm pretty sure that was what we talked about in earlier cycles, so someone missed something 15:15:47 mattdm: ^^ 15:15:47 no, it's explicitly produced because qa and releng believed we wanted it. 15:15:52 Oh ok 15:16:05 Well, someone should make sure that websites are clued in, if that's the case. 15:16:14 /me feels like this should have been a Change Proposal. 15:16:24 * mattdm looks up 15:16:47 mattdm: Any plans to find a place on getfedora for the generic netinstall ISO? 15:16:57 And if not, should there be? 15:17:45 I'll talk with mizmo / design about it, but my thinking is "somewhere, but not getfedora.org" 15:18:39 ok 15:18:59 So, does this change our minds at all on what environments to offer on the DVD? 15:20:53 I'm slightly in favor of keeping it as long as Server is a proper super-set (which it should always be, if "minimal" becomes based off the core module work) 15:21:22 With the condition that it's named Fedora Custom Operating System or similar 15:22:04 sgallagh: keeping *what*? 15:22:09 * adamw doesn't really care, will just direct complaints about network traffic at PHX to sgallagh if it goes away. ;) 15:22:22 jds2001: keeping something like 'minimal' as an available environment from the Server DVD. 15:22:37 or, strictly speaking, putting it back, since it's not there ATM. 15:22:55 * jds2001 is mildly opposed, but not enoguh to get worked up over :) 15:23:10 jds2001: Keeping something roughly equivalent to "minimal" on the DVD, but named clearly 15:24:04 * jds2001 thiniks that the Server brand is valuable 15:24:29 Right, which is why I agree with mizmo that the two entries should be "Fedora Server Edition" and "Fedora Custom Operating System" 15:24:40 and producing something that results in something that is explicitly *not* Server is....strange, considering it comes from media we produce. 15:24:42 Makes it clear (to me at least), that the latter *is not Fedora Server Edition* 15:24:54 That's a fair point 15:25:37 I think the other argument is that we don't want to frustrate people who didn't get the brand message initially and downloaded the "wrong" media 15:25:48 Because that's our fault, not theirs. :) 15:26:11 I don't know; three years in it's kind of on them for missing the memo 15:27:07 /me notes that we have minimal quorum today, so if we make a decision it must be by consensus. 15:27:44 * jds2001 is not so strongly opposed as to be obstructionist :) 15:28:16 OK, formal proposal (and if anyone is in opposition, we can continue to discuss): 15:29:03 Proposal: Fedora 24 (Beta and Final) will ship with two installable environments: "Fedora Server Edition" and "Fedora Custom Operating System", with "Fedora Server Edition" as the default. 15:29:09 +1 15:29:15 +1 15:29:47 +1 fine with me 15:29:57 +1 15:30:07 +1 15:30:20 #agreed Fedora 24 (Beta and Final) will ship with two installable environments: "Fedora Server Edition" and "Fedora Custom Operating System", with "Fedora Server Edition" as the default. (+5, 0, -0) 15:30:32 #topic Default guided partitioning scheme 15:31:01 jds2001: I'm particularly interested to hear your thoughts here from a consumer perspective. 15:31:46 IMHO we should do lvm with a / and swap and the rest free space. 15:31:47 sgallagh: i think most folks use kickstart and/or custom partitioning to avoid this problem entirely 15:32:19 jds2001: Well, that fact alone speaks volumes to the current defaults not being good 15:32:23 sgallagh: though most of my experience comes in the enterprise space, not the SMB type space. 15:32:52 sgallagh: i agree, the defaults are rubbish for a server. 15:32:53 nirik: I'm leaning the same way, but I'm open to other thoughts. 15:33:19 I think thats the most flexable and makes the most sense for a server. 15:33:35 but / should be somewhat small 15:33:36 jds2001: The current proposal on the table is basically: the default is to use up to X GiB for /, the same guesses for swap and leave the remainder as unused space in the VG for later adjustment. 15:33:44 i think even 50GB is *way* too big 15:33:53 yeah, I would say 25 or 30 perhaps 15:34:39 * jds2001 also saw separate /var was on the table on the list 15:34:49 stefw: The side-effect here would be that we'd want to direct people more heavily at Cockpit for post-install storage management. Which, since that's a major focus right now, seems sensible. 15:34:52 which again, I think everyone separares anyhow. 15:34:58 * nirik thinks seperate var is horrible. ;) 15:35:12 nirik: for what reason? 15:35:23 well, depends what your use case is strongly. 15:35:33 nirik: I *have* seen some people with / on spinning rust and /var on SSD for performance 15:35:37 so if you want that you can make one easily from free space 15:35:50 But that's clearly a case for custom partitioning 15:35:58 nirik: fsvo "easily" :) 15:36:10 well, whats the advantage of splitting it out? 15:36:12 Right, migrating content is harder 15:36:31 If it's common-enough, that might be an argument for specific UX in Cockpit, though 15:36:48 nirik: lots of packages have conktent in /var by default 15:36:56 nirik: read-only /usr, for one 15:36:59 nirik: /var/www/html for instance 15:37:16 jds2001: thats what /srv is for... ;) 15:37:29 nirik: not disagreeing.... ;) 15:37:46 but for folks that leave things as they're shipped.... 15:38:21 well the shipped case should cover 90% 15:38:27 * nirik hasn't put anything in /var/www/html for... many many years. I don't know how many people still do 15:38:33 I think the better solution is what I suggested above: have a supported workflow in Cockpit for splitting /var upon request (complete with moving/rsyncing its current contents) 15:38:39 the shipped case should cover what we recommend most people do 15:38:49 but if you are going to, you can make a seperate /var/www/html mount... instead of messing with /var 15:39:38 * stefw cries that we don't have zfs or something like it and are still talking in 1900's terms 15:39:41 nirik: plus, /var/log filling up / is.....not good. 15:39:42 stefw: I agree; I've never really understood why we haven't moved /var/www/html to /srv 15:39:46 or grow / I suppose if you put lots of things in var 15:39:48 some folks even have a separate /var/log 15:40:07 yeah, but you know... filling up... anything is bad. ;) So it's just shifting the problem around. 15:40:30 well, /srv isn't allowed to me messed with by the distro. 15:40:39 so httpd couldnt make dirs there or whatever. 15:40:41 sgallagh, so what are the concerete parts of this proposal? 15:40:48 is it written somewhere? did i miss a link? 15:40:59 stefw: Which one? There are three on the table right now :) 15:41:02 agree that we should not force people to make all decisions in installer 15:41:13 only those that are necessary to bringing up a system 15:41:28 I'll list them, one moment 15:42:08 sgallagh: could the Cockpit "separate /var" workflow be made generic? "Migrate data" for instance? 15:42:31 sgallagh: i can see usefulness in that. 15:42:49 Proposal 1) Server default autopartitioning will use between 2GiB and 15GiB for /, an autodetected amount of space for swap using the current heuristics and leave the remainder unused in a volume group to be assigned or extended later. 15:43:17 oh, did we want /boot to be outside the lvm also? 15:43:24 Proposal 2) Server default autopartitioning will use between 2GiB and 15GiB for /, an autodetected amount of space for swap and X GiB of space for /var, using the current heuristics and leave the remainder unused in a volume group to be assigned or extended later. 15:43:27 sgallagh: what about unpartitioned? 15:44:09 Proposal 3) Cockpit adds a user-friendly workflow for splitting a mount point from a partition while copying its data (use-case: splitting off /var/log or /var/www/html, etc.) 15:44:18 Props 1 and 2 are mutexed, of course 15:44:33 nirik: That's actually out of our control at the moment. 15:44:42 Anaconda handles that "correctly" 15:44:52 (RE: /boot) 15:45:12 jds2001: Sorry, what about unpartitioned ? 15:45:18 +1 1, -1 2, 0 on 3 (up to cockpit folks if they feel it's a good use case to support) 15:45:43 have to go sorry 15:46:17 /me wonders if we can stall for 15 minutes and see if anyone shows up that was confused by the time-change 15:46:20 so the proposal 3 needs to be figured out on its own ... make sure it's possible, understand the limitations 15:46:45 stefw: I mostly raised that as a means to make the decision between 1 and 2 easier. 15:46:48 sgallagh: i was thinking about usecases that might want a separate vg, raw partitons, etc. 15:46:56 If that functionality appears, it likely makes prop 2 unnecessary 15:47:06 sgallagh: but i think that lvm works for 90%, so lets solve for that :) 15:47:10 forget i said anything :) 15:47:18 jds2001: That's well into "use kickstart or Cockpit's advanced capabilities" 15:50:16 * jds2001 thinks that 1+3 is the way to go. 15:50:41 I agree, assuming that 3 is feasible. But I'm also not convinced they have to be delivered at the same time. 15:50:57 no, they don't 15:51:18 perhaps a magazine post or something explaining how to migrate data. 15:51:29 Migrating data is a Hard Problem 15:51:30 until 3 is available. 15:51:42 Especially when talking about /var, which may be getting written to constantly 15:51:56 yup, constantly has open files 15:52:10 yeah, i'd boot single user 15:52:22 I think there's some magic that could be done with lvm snapshots and lvm RAID mirroring, though 15:52:50 right, so that's the sorta thing that needs to be built into a tool ... a tool that could be exposed in the UI, make it discoverable etc 15:52:56 Yes 15:54:28 We don't have to solve this here. 15:54:35 * jds2001 could work on writing a script/tool to do that. 15:55:06 We don't actually have quorum any more, but I think we're approaching consensus. I'll write something up for the mailing list and we can vote on-list (or wait and see if mizmo finds some additional customer feedback) 15:55:22 jds2001: That would be very interesting indeed. 15:55:44 The ideal case would be for it to be built into storaged somehow. 15:56:06 OK, at this point, I want to move into Open Floor, as I have something to discuss there briefly. 15:56:12 And we're approaching the top of the hour 15:56:49 #topic Open Floor 15:57:45 This is difficult for me to say, but I'm going to be stepping down from the Server WG, effective after the March 29th meeting or F24 Alpha Go decision, whichever comes later. 15:58:04 :( 15:58:19 It's a combination of burn-out and my day job putting me on other tasks with less overlap. 15:59:29 I won't disappear entirely and I'll help with the transition as well as I can, but I won't be nearly as involved day-to-day as I have been 15:59:31 Understandable. 16:00:02 we should likely call for another member on the list at least and see if anyone wants to step up to chair and organize things. 16:00:12 /me nods 16:00:20 yep 16:00:32 and thanks sgallagh, you have really been the force behind the group. :) 16:01:02 Thanks, it's been quite a ride, but I need to get off and walk for a while. 16:01:06 I'm sure I'll be back 16:01:47 Does anyone else have anything for Open Floor? 16:02:11 * nirik does not 16:02:19 * jds2001 does not 16:03:06 OK, I'll close out the meeting in two minutes if there's nothing else. 16:05:23 #endmeeting