instructions for requesting new packages #655
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
miabbott
force-pushed
the
pkg_questions
branch
from
c6678d9 to
eb0a331
Compare
jlebon
approved these changes
Oct 27, 2020
miabbott
force-pushed
the
pkg_questions
branch
2 times, most recently
from
40ed965 to
afeb470
Compare
jlebon
approved these changes
Oct 27, 2020
dustymabe
approved these changes
Oct 27, 2020
NEWPACKAGE.md
Outdated
| 1. What, if any, are the additional dependencies on the package? (i.e. does it drag in Python, Perl, etc) | ||
| 2. What is the size of the package and its dependencies? | ||
| 3. What problem are you trying to solve with this package? Or what functionality does the package provide? | ||
| 4. Can the package be run from a container? Explain why or why not. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| 4. Can the package be run from a container? Explain why or why not. | |
| 4. Can the software provided by the package be run from a container? Explain why or why not. |
NEWPACKAGE.md
Outdated
| 2. What is the size of the package and its dependencies? | ||
| 3. What problem are you trying to solve with this package? Or what functionality does the package provide? | ||
| 4. Can the package be run from a container? Explain why or why not. | ||
| 5. Can the tool be helpful in debugging container runtime issues? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| 5. Can the tool be helpful in debugging container runtime issues? | |
| 5. Can the tool(s) provided by the package be helpful in debugging container runtime issues? |
NEWPACKAGE.md
Outdated
| 3. What problem are you trying to solve with this package? Or what functionality does the package provide? | ||
| 4. Can the package be run from a container? Explain why or why not. | ||
| 5. Can the tool be helpful in debugging container runtime issues? | ||
| 6. Can the tool be helpful in debugging networking issues? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| 6. Can the tool be helpful in debugging networking issues? | |
| 6. Can the tool(s) provided by the package be helpful in debugging networking issues? |
NEWPACKAGE.md
Outdated
| 5. Can the tool be helpful in debugging container runtime issues? | ||
| 6. Can the tool be helpful in debugging networking issues? | ||
| 7. Is it possible to layer the package onto the base OS as a day 2 operation? Explain why or why not. | ||
| 8. Can the packaging be adjusted to just deliver binaries? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| 8. Can the packaging be adjusted to just deliver binaries? | |
| 8. In the case of packages providing services and binaries, can the packaging be adjusted to just deliver binaries? |
NEWPACKAGE.md
Outdated
| 6. Can the tool be helpful in debugging networking issues? | ||
| 7. Is it possible to layer the package onto the base OS as a day 2 operation? Explain why or why not. | ||
| 8. Can the packaging be adjusted to just deliver binaries? | ||
| 9. Can the tool be used to do things we’d rather users not be able to do in FCOS? (e.g. can it be abused as a Turing complete interpreter?) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| 9. Can the tool be used to do things we’d rather users not be able to do in FCOS? (e.g. can it be abused as a Turing complete interpreter?) | |
| 9. Can the tool(s) provided by the package be used to do things we’d rather users not be able to do in FCOS? (e.g. can it be abused as a Turing complete interpreter?) |
NEWPACKAGE.md
Outdated
| 7. Is it possible to layer the package onto the base OS as a day 2 operation? Explain why or why not. | ||
| 8. Can the packaging be adjusted to just deliver binaries? | ||
| 9. Can the tool be used to do things we’d rather users not be able to do in FCOS? (e.g. can it be abused as a Turing complete interpreter?) | ||
| 10. Does the tool have a history of CVEs? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| 10. Does the tool have a history of CVEs? | |
| 10. Do the software provided by the package have a history of CVEs? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should be "Does the software...", no?
bgilbert
reviewed
Oct 28, 2020
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for doing this!
I'm in favor of adding the questionnaire as a new-issue template in the chooser rather than a separate NEWPACKAGE.md file. Without that, I suspect users will file ordinary feature requests anyway, and we'll have to refer them back to the instructions.
NEWPACKAGE.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| Please title the new issue: `Package Request: <name of package>` | ||
|
|
||
| 1. What, if any, are the additional dependencies on the package? (i.e. does it drag in Python, Perl, etc) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nit: nicer phrasing:
Suggested change
| 1. What, if any, are the additional dependencies on the package? (i.e. does it drag in Python, Perl, etc) | |
| 1. What, if any, are the additional dependencies on the package? (i.e. does it pull in Python, Perl, etc) |
NEWPACKAGE.md
Outdated
| 7. Is it possible to layer the package onto the base OS as a day 2 operation? Explain why or why not. | ||
| 8. Can the packaging be adjusted to just deliver binaries? | ||
| 9. Can the tool be used to do things we’d rather users not be able to do in FCOS? (e.g. can it be abused as a Turing complete interpreter?) | ||
| 10. Does the tool have a history of CVEs? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should be "Does the software...", no?
An initial set of instructions on how to request a new package be added to FCOS. This can be folded into a chooser option for new issues, if desired. Closes coreos#641
miabbott
force-pushed
the
pkg_questions
branch
from
afeb470 to
a3eafa6
Compare
|
Thanks for the feedback Dusty + Benjamin! I've pushed a new update. Re: the new issue chooser - I'd say let's merge these changes as is (just so we agree on wording) and afterwards I'll setup the chooser. It won't hurt to have the file around, IMO. |
bgilbert
approved these changes
Oct 28, 2020
miabbott
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 28, 2020
I took a guess at what would be good for the bug report template. The new package template is taken from #655.
miabbott
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 28, 2020
* Bug Report + New Package templates I took a guess at what would be good for the bug report template. The new package template is taken from #655. Co-authored-by: Dusty Mabe <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
An initial set of instructions on how to request a new package be
added to FCOS. This can be folded into a chooser option for new
issues, if desired.
Closes #641