Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Location for treefiles/manifests used in composing ostree #538

Closed
jmpolom opened this issue Mar 8, 2024 · 4 comments
Closed

Location for treefiles/manifests used in composing ostree #538

jmpolom opened this issue Mar 8, 2024 · 4 comments
Labels
docs Related to the docs or needing docs

Comments

@jmpolom
Copy link

jmpolom commented Mar 8, 2024

Where can the treefiles/manifests be found that are used to generate the official ostrees used for Silverblue?

At one point these were (somewhat buried) on pagure but discoverable. Now, they no longer seem to be there and I am unable to find them after looking for many hours. I have located the source manifests/treefiles/compose config repo: https://pagure.io/workstation-ostree-config

Please provide a link to where these are maintained now. I would appreciate if this info was added prominently into documentation somewhere and kept up to date with current locations.

Users should not have to go dumpster diving for this.

@travier
Copy link
Member

travier commented Mar 11, 2024

The location has never changed and is linked from https://github.com/fedora-silverblue#contributing

Can you clarify where you would like to have this?

@travier travier added the docs Related to the docs or needing docs label Mar 11, 2024
@jmpolom
Copy link
Author

jmpolom commented Mar 11, 2024

Forgive me for missing it on the organization's page. This is not where I'd expect to find it.

I would suggest adding it to this project's README as this issue tracker pertains (ostensibly) to the contents of those manifests used to build the ostree.

Unfortunately the current state of Fedora project artifacts being scattered amongst github, gitlab and internal tooling creates a very confusing and difficult to navigate situation for users (accessibility issue). It is very odd to find an issue tracker in an SCM system with effectively an empty repository associated to it, tracking issues for something located elsewhere. This is not a normal pattern in the usage of these tools.

@travier
Copy link
Member

travier commented Mar 11, 2024

I've copied all the links in #541

@travier
Copy link
Member

travier commented Mar 11, 2024

Ideally we would recentralize everything under a single namespace on GitLab:

But this hasn't happened yet as we need to migrate all the issues, etc. and that takes time.

@travier travier closed this as completed Mar 11, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
docs Related to the docs or needing docs
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants