My two cents:
If this current instance goes away, do we feel confident it’ll be swapped for an “official” instance?
Yes - in fact, I don’t see a reason that the current one will go away. If Fedora release engineering, or FESCO, or the Council (or whatever decision making body is appropriate) would deem it official, I think it could evolve into that role as is. If for whatever reason that’s not possible, yes it will be replaced.
We stood it up just in time for Flock, but then pivoted to focus on other things right after. If you’re tracking the fedora + konflux sig meetings, I hope you see that we’re working now towards smoothing operations for it; supporting it better, for more than just Flock PoCs.
I see that there’s a fedora-bootc tenant in the Fedora infra gitlab org, I wonder what steps we’d need to take to start testing out builds of the fedora-bootc base image in this instance.
Let us get it updated to the latest version of Konflux as in MintMaker (Renovate) update infra-deployments for Konflux and then give it a try.
Send a merge request to the bootc tenant in the tenants-config repo to add yourself and others with rights to the fedora-bootc tenant so that you can login and work there. From there, I think you should onboard a fedora-bootc git repo and copy over the .tekton/ content from the centos-bootc image’s .tekton/ dir as a starting point.
Is the existing Fedora Konflux instance considered appropriate for that sort of thing, building an official Fedora deliverable, or is that further down the road?
From strictly my own point of view, I think it will be appropriate soon (like, in the next few weeks) for that (once we’re happier with the way we’re operating it). But, to really call it appropriate for an official Fedora deliverable is not my call to make. +1 from me, but - do you need to sync with releng or another body?
Where will end-users consume fedora-bootc from? From quay.io/fedora/ ? (Yes, that looks right).