Fedora Games Spin : Requesting Board Approval

[Jeremy Katz]

On Thu, 2007-09-27 at 11:16 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
> I'd actually like to suggest we do the custom spins over torrents 
> because it will allow us to judge some popularity and its a much lower 
> barrier to entry.  I'm actually working to find some space dedicated to 
> a more robust torrent server (possibly one with as much as 1T of space) 
> which could make hosting that stuff much easier.

Torrent seems mostly reasonable.  The only downside is that some places
block torrent access.  That has historically been the reason for not
providing things torrent-only.  But I don't think that it's a good
enough reason and that we also set up a way to "request a spin" via a
non-torrent method and then if we get a lot of that, we can revisit
also.

> Also, I think custom spins don't need to follow the same guidelines as 
> Fedora proper.  I don't know why, for example, a spin couldn't be 
> released in the middle of a cycle. 

Yep.  No good reason they can't be.

>  The question of how something gets 
> from the SIG to the torrent is still questionable in my mind.  I've not 
> looked at wevisor that much but I know a web based version is being 
> planned.  In the meantime perhaps they could work with the 
> Infrastructure team once the spin has been approved until a permanent 
> solution can be put in place?

Right, this is the biggest stumbling block.  We had talked about getting
some hardware and moving doing the release spins to hardware in the
colo.  If we did that, we could also do the live spins like this there.
And I have a few ideas on how we can make that (relatively) reasonable
and safe, but they're a bit grotty[1]

> My concern is that stifling the custom spins very early in life will 
> dissuade others from participating.  Even if in the future a custom spin 
> just becomes a set of default installed packages + cool custom theme, I 
> think people will like that.  

Yep

> Though the question of QA is a good one.  
> I've not looked at how customized (and therefore different) from Fedora 
> a spin can get to the point where it'd need a separate QA path.

I'm okay (Will will have to speak for himself though) if the QA is done
as part of the SIG who's working on it.  That plus review of the config
should be pretty good for finding problems.

Jeremy

[1] Sadly, mock can't really help as mock's "dealing" with SELinux runs
very counter to what's needed for SELinux with live image creation.