Meeting started at 2026-09-02 17:00:28 UTC

The Meeting name is 'fedora-server'

!group members server-wg

**Usage:** !group members <groupname>

!Hi

Welcome to our weekly Server WG meeting.

As usual, let's wait a moment for everybody to show up.

!hello

Emmanuel Seyman: Emmanuel Seyman (eseyman) - he / him / his

!hello

No Fedora Accounts users have the @pa_ubach:matrix.org Matrix Account defined

Oh, Zodbot’s being fussy again

!hello

mowest: Steve Daley (mowest)

There aren’t many of us here today, but at least we’ve got our quorum. So let’s get started.

We had agreed to continue the discussion, particularly regarding the Server Documentation.

As of our Matrix discussion we came up with the following agenda

Any last minute addition?

None from me

OK Let's start

Regarding the action, see the list in our

meetings overview:

https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/server-working-group/wg-minutes-2026/

As always our action list:

Did I forget something?

That's more than enough for an hour of discussion...

Yeah

Any announcements?

None from me

Ni

No

OK

Tracking issue: https://forge.fedoraproject.org/server/tickets/issues/203

Tracking issue: https://forge.fedoraproject.org/server/tickets/issues/193 (image issue)

max 10 mins

Just regarding our VM issue:

Neil managed to get the Kiwi issue fixed. So we hopefully will have a correct LVM tag soon.

I don't have anything to contribute…

Adam posted various things in our Server channel, looking there:

There a questions about the VM LVM thing. Have to deal with that after meeting.

Any new info's about current testing?

I was wondering kind of the same as Conan, actually. I have never really understood LVM

My plan is to do my testing this week.

Haven't done any testing with F45 yet, so nothing from me. Fixed a DNS issue with home lab.but that has nothing to do with Fedora 😁

Same for me. I couldn't do any testing this week.

So many CVEs... So many packages to update...

Right, let’s not be sad; let’s hope for better times.

Let's proceed with next item. There is enough to do for today.

Tracking issue: https://forge.fedoraproject.org/server/tickets/issues/261

I propose, we go step by step through the sections of the ticket.

Do we need a break for reading? I managed to do it a 'bit 'late

I vote for post-installation customizations. I know it's lengthy

I like all of the proposals, and I lime the "alternative" titles.

Yeah let's start with === sub-item New structure for postinstall

I like all of the proposals, and I like the "alternative" titles.

Regarding naming, my general preference is: Self-explanatory titles that are as short as possible but clearly state what the section is about and why it is relevant.

So I would keep the 'customization' part in post(-)installation.

Yep, because esch machine will be different

What about simply "Customizations"

Probably a native speaker can choose between post-installation and postinstallation (the latter is the Red Hat way, as I understand it).

OK, as I understan: just customizations, without any post-....

If Red Hat has some time tested wording conventions, defaulting to them especially for Fedora Server seems wise.

The ‘post-installation’ section shows that these steps are essential. I think

Yes just an idea, the fact they would happen after install seems self evident

Yeah, maybe selfevident, maybe seen as 'optional' (and some of the steps are definitely not.)

Obviously, we can agree about "Postinstallation Customizations"

That would be evident when entering into the contents. But as I understand is that the idea is to make the title/heading self-explanatory

Any objections?

Proposal (1) !agreed Section name: Postinstallation Customizations

3

Sounds fine

2

1

Ok

Proposal:(2) !agreed Section position: 4th after Containerization

That would be the position in the navigation tree.

Any objections?

Customizations after Containerization?

Yes

Or better after Installation?

If I consider. it, after installation is more intuitive

Agreed

Proposal:(2) !agreed Section position: 2nd after Installation

I am already well into customizations my self in my server setup, and I haven't yet started on any virtualization, which to me would come before Containerization. But I am very short on knowledge (and specially experience)

OK, so I think:

For the section titles in Postinstallation .... I propose a mixture of what we have disussed on Matrix so far:

Proposal (3) !agreed 1. content item of postinstall: First steps

Proposal (4) !agreed 2. content item of postinstall: Network consolidation

Proposal (5) !agreed 3. content item of postinstall: Storage organizagtion

Proposal (6) !agreed 4. content item of postinstall: Security Hardening

Proposal (7) !agreed 5. content item of postinstall: Automatic updates

Proposal (8) !agreed 6. content item of postinstall: Backup organization

And of course, later we will add sections as needs arise

I like the shorter versions of all of those under "alternative"

Wouldn't you discuss Storage inside Installation?

Yes, I do it currently. But it is so large, therefore I would prefer to link to an Excursus to meet all the details.

And the current versions are too incomplete.

Moderation: the alternative is shorter only for Network and Storage. And I think, that's too short and meaningless

mowest: the alternative is shorter only for Network and Storage. And I think, that's too short and meaningless

I made the comment because I realized (after the fact) that I had organized my storage wrong in order to be able to take advantage of Btrfs snapshots feature

Oh, I thought it was okay because it would be nice and short in the side menu and is already a sub category.

And regarding LVM, we currently don't say anything about thin provisioning, which is relevant.

And we mention BTRFS as an alternative, but don't describe anything about it.

I think of it as an "All-things Storage" in Postinstall Customizations, and an Excursus with practical tips in Installation

That's a good idea! That makes installation fluidly readable, and provides more information it wanted.

Is the thin provisioning a reference to the small root directory when there is often gigs to work with?

Among others yes. But maybe more important are LVs for web pages, git storage, etc

But let's concentrate on the naming at the moment. About content we have to discuss, when we write each of the articlesö

If I’ve understood correctly, can we decide on the six names in the block?

I see no objection, therefore:

I would appreciate an explanation, and the steps to increase the root directory which I have to look up with each new install and find on a random Red Hat page because my root directory fills up after a couple of months of updates and new kernel because.of how small the initial is, I always end up expanding it to fill the whole drive.

Fail2ban is a title that I don't understand. It's outside my knowledge pool

If we go with two words which I don't prefer for any of them, could we be consistent and capitalize both words?

Pere-Andreu: fail2ban is a program to block access for ips which produce login errors - among others. It is one program that provides security hardening.

mowest: Yes, in the Navigation bar and in the Article title we capitalize the words.

(I think, wie do already, but probably not consístently yet)

Updates will only be automatic in the dcumentation?

Once again my preference is "backups, security, networking, storage..."

No, there is a program where you can choose, apply some types of updates or all updates automatically or just sent a mail to the admin address

mowest: OK, then I have to undo and we have to vote separately. I hope zodbot play along here.

!undo

Hm, that doesn't work.

OK, let's to it the other way.

Proposed. !agreed we revoke the last 6 agreements and redo a voting for each item.

The voting would be in the ticket.

I can start this later today or tomorrow, that we have a voting period of 2 weeks.

Works for me

So we can't proceed with this part at the moment. Therefore, lets use the remainting time vor the next sub-item:

== sub-item: New structure for navigation bar

That is about the Virtualization and Containerization items. The other items are already decided.

Basically, we agreed in our Matrix channel. so:

proposed: !agreed We leave the current navigation bar naming as is.

In the Server room there seemed to be consensus on Virtualization

Yeah, about both. And all the other ideas inside the tickel are already implemented.

I don't have criteria on Contaners vs Containerization

I think it's the same as your reasoning regarding virtualization

OK, then that's clear

I see no objections here.

3

2

1

I think, then we can close the tickets, all the elements are done.

Proposal !agreed We close ticket #224

any objection here?

3

Nope

Will the other section be broke. Out to a different ticket for voting as was mentioned?

Will the other section titles be broken out to a different ticket for voting as was mentioned?

No, because the voting is about the titles insice the section postinstallation customizations

Oh so ticket 244 is a different ticket

This agree is just about the main topics of navigation bar.

Yes, 224n ist about main navigation, 228 about details of the postinstallation section.

All good, close the ticket

and 244 is about Python

OK

So, our time is up.

Sorry typo on my part

Time flies!

Nevertheless for short:

Just to comment that I am making progresses in my homelab setup. And hope to be able to have a draft document of the process by the end of this month

We have to decide, whether we can discuss next meeting about Ansible. We shouldn't do that it Emmanuel can't join because of his Perl obligations

Emmanuel Seyman: ???

It is the 2nd Wednesday

OK, Emmanuel seems already offline. So let's close and continue to discuss about the next agenda in our Matrix room.

Bye!