issue tracker for fedora releng integration

[cgwalters]

I don't know all of the issues until we try but here's some I think may be issues:

• I want our build process to use modern containers - specifically https://github.com/coreos/coreos-assembler/ (not koji+mock)
• The prototype config repo currently lives on github - now I want to support "offline" builds too, do we just set up an automatic pagure import, or do people want to move it to pagure?

[bgilbert]

For the record, why does Pagure need to be involved?

[dustymabe]

For the record, why does Pagure need to be involved?

It is a place fedora releng pulls configs from for builds (i.e. image builds or rpm-ostree composes, etc..) I'm not aware of any place other than pagure being allowed (at the moment), but I could be wrong.

[dustymabe]

some of this work (i.e. answering the question "What asks to we have of Fedora Releng?") is predicated on some of the work I'm doing in #49 - marking this as blocked for now.

[dustymabe]

I believe we have done some of this (design doc was created in #171) and we can close this in favor of follow on tickets. Some of which are:

• Implement tooling for release streams #137
• Finalize artifact storage strategy #169

[jlebon]

Agreed, though the Pagure bit is still outstanding I think. We should bring this up with releng.

[dustymabe]

Agreed, though the Pagure bit is still outstanding I think. We should bring this up with releng.

We're already pulling from github and I interpreted them being willing to accept CentOS CI built artifacts as them also being OK with us pulling our manifest from Github. I'll open a ticket to get it ratified.

[dustymabe]

I'll open a ticket to get it ratified.

opened a ticket with releng: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8373

[dustymabe]

releng acknowledged us using GitHub for our configs and are OK with it: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8373#comment-571672