forge/forge
11
8
Fork 8
Code Issues 96 Pull requests 1 Projects Wiki Activity Actions

New organization for Fedora Atomic #597

New issue
Closed
opened 2026-05-27 09:18:25 +00:00 by cverna · 15 comments
cverna commented 2026-05-27 09:18:25 +00:00
Copy link

Eligibility Criteria

  • Governance and Team Organization: Trackers, documentation, and collaborative spaces for official Fedora Teams, Special Interest Groups (SIGs), Working Groups, and Fedora Council initiatives.

Desired Organization Name (Short Name)

atomic

Full Name of Organization

Fedora Atomic

Description of Organization’s Purpose

The home of the Fedora/CentOS Atomic project. The Fedora/CentOS bootc project generates reference "base images" of so-called bootable containers that are designed for use with the bootc project.

Website URL

https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/bootc/

No response

Fedora Accounts Group for Organization Owners

cverna, siosm, nimbinatus, walters

Other Information

This is a different organization than the Fedora Atomic Desktops.

### Eligibility Criteria - **Governance and Team Organization:** Trackers, documentation, and collaborative spaces for official Fedora Teams, Special Interest Groups (SIGs), Working Groups, and Fedora Council initiatives. ### Desired Organization Name (Short Name) atomic ### Full Name of Organization Fedora Atomic ### Description of Organization’s Purpose The home of the Fedora/CentOS Atomic project. The Fedora/CentOS bootc project generates reference "base images" of so-called bootable containers that are designed for use with the bootc project. ### Website URL https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/bootc/ ### Avatar/Logo _No response_ ### Fedora Accounts Group for Organization Owners cverna, siosm, nimbinatus, walters ### Other Information This is a different organization than the Fedora Atomic Desktops.
👍 1 🎉 1
cverna commented 2026-05-27 09:18:52 +00:00
Author
Copy link

We are waiting on a 👍 from council to re-use the atomic branding council/tickets#569

We are waiting on a 👍 from council to re-use the atomic branding https://forge.fedoraproject.org/council/tickets/issues/569
ryanlerch added this to the Sprint 21 project 2026-05-27 09:35:31 +00:00
walters commented 2026-05-27 15:02:00 +00:00
Copy link

This is a different organization than the Fedora Atomic Desktops.

Does it need to be?

> This is a different organization than the Fedora Atomic Desktops. Does it need to be?
walters commented 2026-05-27 15:02:39 +00:00
Copy link

I guess from my PoV it seems easier to just have one "Fedora Atomic" that has a variety of base images and outputs.

I guess from my PoV it seems easier to just have one "Fedora Atomic" that has a variety of base images and outputs.
cverna commented 2026-05-27 15:06:36 +00:00
Author
Copy link

Does it need to be?

I think this the path of least resistance, I agree that it would make sense to propose to the Atomic Desktops SIG to merge in the long term.

> Does it need to be? I think this the path of least resistance, I agree that it would make sense to propose to the Atomic Desktops SIG to merge in the long term.
👍 3
walters commented 2026-05-27 17:13:26 +00:00
Copy link

OK, SGTM.

OK, SGTM.
siosm commented 2026-05-28 06:49:22 +00:00
Copy link

I agree that it likely makes sense to merge the orgs in the long term.

For the short term, starting with a new atomic org will let us focus on migrating GitLab's bootc group to this forge. I expect this to be a non trivial amount of work as we'll likely be the first one to fully exercise Forgejo's support in Konflux.

Then we could look at merging things as we move closer to dropping support for the ostree variants.

I agree that it likely makes sense to merge the orgs in the long term. For the short term, starting with a new `atomic` org will let us focus on migrating GitLab's `bootc` group to this forge. I expect this to be a non trivial amount of work as we'll likely be the first one to fully exercise Forgejo's support in Konflux. Then we could look at merging things as we move closer to dropping support for the ostree variants.
hricky commented 2026-05-28 08:27:00 +00:00
Collaborator
Copy link

@siosm wrote in #597 (comment):

I expect this to be a non trivial amount of work as we'll likely be the first one to fully exercise Forgejo's support in Konflux.

This may be a bit off topic, but the Fedora Forge team is already doing this, see OCI Image Build Pipeline for Fedora Forge.

@siosm wrote in https://forge.fedoraproject.org/forge/forge/issues/597#issuecomment-762615: > I expect this to be a non trivial amount of work as we'll likely be the first one to fully exercise Forgejo's support in Konflux. This may be a bit off topic, but the Fedora Forge team is already doing this, see [OCI Image Build Pipeline for Fedora Forge](https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/forge-documentation/oci_image_pipeline/).
👍 1
cverna commented 2026-05-28 11:53:32 +00:00
Author
Copy link

@hricky that's interesting, thanks for sharing

@hricky that's interesting, thanks for sharing
ryanlerch commented 2026-06-01 06:21:00 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

This is now ready to go:

https://forge.fedoraproject.org/atomic

The owners team is linked to:

https://accounts.fedoraproject.org/group/forge-atomic-owners/

This is now ready to go: https://forge.fedoraproject.org/atomic The owners team is linked to: https://accounts.fedoraproject.org/group/forge-atomic-owners/
siosm commented 2026-06-01 21:28:42 +00:00
Copy link

The setup is weird. For the Atomic Desktops org we have an owner team and a member team. Here we only have an owner team. Can we get a members FAS group as well?

The setup is weird. For the Atomic Desktops org we have an owner team and a member team. Here we only have an owner team. Can we get a members FAS group as well?
siosm commented 2026-06-01 21:29:11 +00:00
Copy link

Or should we now just create this team on the forge?

Or should we now just create this team on the forge?
siosm commented 2026-06-01 21:31:07 +00:00
Copy link

Ah, I see that Clement did not specifically mention a team to create.

Ah, I see that Clement did not specifically mention a team to create.
cverna commented 2026-06-02 06:51:49 +00:00
Author
Copy link

@ryanlerch can we also create a members groups, with the owners as sponsors 🙏

@ryanlerch can we also create a members groups, with the owners as sponsors 🙏
walters commented 2026-06-22 15:45:06 +00:00
Copy link

I was talking with various people at Flock and Devconf.cz and the more I think about this more I like this idea of rebranding and re-centralizing things behind Atomic.

I was talking with various people at Flock and Devconf.cz and the more I think about this more I like this idea of rebranding and re-centralizing things behind Atomic.
👍 1
humaton commented 2026-06-22 16:13:24 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

The group in IPA was created, and sponsors set to forge-atomic-owners group. This needs to get merged and re-run, and the mapping should work.

The group in IPA was created, and sponsors set to forge-atomic-owners group. [This](https://forge.fedoraproject.org/infra/ansible/pulls/3434) needs to get merged and re-run, and the mapping should work.
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag specified
Branches Tags
main
test
docs
No results found.
Labels
Clear labels   
ai-review-please
label for requesting AI code review

  
Org/Team Modification

   
Private Issues
Label for tracking development on Private Issues in Forgejo

  
Runner Request
  
Backlog Status
Needs Review
 Work items that have been created or updated but need review, refinement, or approval before they can be considered ready for sprint planning.

  
Backlog Status
Ready
 Work items that have been reviewed, refined, and are ready to be committed to a sprint. These items have clear requirements and can be worked on immediately when capacity is available.

  
chore
Work that needs to be done but doesn't add new functionality or fix bugs. Maintenance tasks that keep the system running smoothly and the codebase clean.

  
documentation
Work focused on creating, updating, or improving documentation for users, developers, or system administrators.

  
points
01
 A task that is simple, small, and has very little uncertainty. It should be easy enough for any team member to pick up and complete quickly, without a lot of discussion or research.

  
points
02
 This is a task that is slightly more complex or larger than a "1." It might involve two or three simple steps, but the outcome is still very clear and there's little uncertainty.

  
points
03
 Medium-sized task with some noticeable complexity. It might require a bit more thought or collaboration. The steps are well-defined, but it's not a trivial change.

  
points
05
 A significant piece of work. It has more complexity and a higher degree of uncertainty than smaller tasks. It might require some research, a design discussion, or collaboration across multiple teams.

  
points
08
 Complex task with a lot of uncertainty. It's often the largest size that a team will consider for a single sprint. It likely requires a detailed breakdown and multiple team members to complete.

  
points
13
 Any task that feels like it's a "13" or more is considered an Epic. These are too large and uncertain to be worked on in a single sprint and should be broken down.

  
Priority
High
 This is for work that is critical and needs to be addressed in the next sprint. It's often for urgent bugs, important features, or a major piece of technical debt that is blocking other work.

  
Priority
Low
 This is for work that is good to do but not urgent. It's a candidate for being worked on when there's extra time or when it rises in importance. It can stay in the backlog for a longer period.

  
Priority
Medium
 This is for important work that should be done soon, but isn't as urgent as a high-priority item. It will likely be considered for the next 1-2 sprints.

  
Sprint Status
Blocked
 Work items that cannot progress due to external dependencies, blockers, or issues that need resolution.

  
Sprint Status
Done
 Work items that have been completed, reviewed, and integrated. No further work is needed within the current sprint.

  
Sprint Status
In Progress
 Work items currently being worked on by a team member. Active development, research, or implementation is happening.

  
Sprint Status
Review
 Work items that are complete but need review, testing, or approval before being marked as done.

  
Sprint Status
To Do
 Work items that are committed to the sprint but haven't been started yet. These items are ready to be picked up by team members.

  
Technical Debt
Work that addresses shortcuts, workarounds, or suboptimal implementations that were done previously to meet deadlines. These items improve code quality, maintainability, or performance without adding new features.

  
Work Item
Bug
 Issues where the system is not working as intended or designed. Bugs represent deviations from expected behavior.

  
Work Item
Epic
 Large initiatives that are broken down into multiple smaller work items (user stories, tasks, bugs). Epics represent significant features or projects that span multiple sprints.

  
Work Item
Spike
 Time-boxed research, investigation, or proof-of-concept work to reduce uncertainty or explore solutions. Spikes help inform future development decisions.

  
Work Item
Task
 Used to break down larger user stories into smaller, manageable implementation pieces. They focus on the specific technical steps needed to deliver the user story's value.

  
Work Item
User Story
 User-facing features or functionality that can be framed from a user perspective, describing what someone wants to accomplish and why.

No labels
ai-review-please
Org/Team Modification
Private Issues
Runner Request
Backlog Status
Needs Review
Backlog Status
Ready
chore
documentation
points
01
points
02
points
03
points
05
points
08
points
13
Priority
High
Priority
Low
Priority
Medium
Sprint Status
Blocked
Sprint Status
Done
Sprint Status
In Progress
Sprint Status
Review
Sprint Status
To Do
Technical Debt
Work Item
Bug
Work Item
Epic
Work Item
Spike
Work Item
Task
Work Item
User Story
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No items
No project
Sprint 21
Assignees
Clear assignees
No assignees
ryanlerch
6 participants
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference
forge/forge#597
No description provided.