16:35:08 <dustymabe> #startmeeting fedora_atomic_wg 16:35:08 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed Jan 10 16:35:08 2018 UTC. The chair is dustymabe. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:35:08 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 16:35:08 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fedora_atomic_wg' 16:35:11 <dustymabe> #topic roll call 16:35:14 <jbrooks> .hello jasonbrooks 16:35:19 <zodbot> jbrooks: jasonbrooks 'Jason Brooks' <jbrooks@redhat.com> 16:35:24 <sayan> .hello sayanchowdhury 16:35:25 <zodbot> sayan: sayanchowdhury 'Sayan Chowdhury' <sayan.chowdhury2012@gmail.com> 16:35:28 <ksinny> .hello sinnykumari 16:35:29 <zodbot> ksinny: sinnykumari 'Sinny Kumari' <ksinny@gmail.com> 16:35:50 <dustymabe> .hello2 16:35:51 <zodbot> dustymabe: dustymabe 'Dusty Mabe' <dustymabe@redhat.com> 16:36:00 <dustymabe> sorry about the delay everyone. was dealing with *parking deck issues* 16:36:09 <ashcrow> .hello smilner 16:36:10 <zodbot> ashcrow: smilner 'None' <smilner@redhat.com> 16:36:20 <sanja> .hello sanja 16:36:21 <zodbot> sanja: sanja 'Sanja Bonic' <sanja@redhat.com> 16:36:35 <kushal> .hellomynameis kushal 16:36:36 <zodbot> kushal: kushal 'Kushal Das' <mail@kushaldas.in> 16:37:07 <strigazi> .hello2 16:37:08 <zodbot> strigazi: strigazi 'Spyros Trigazis' <strigazi@gmail.com> 16:37:13 <jlebon> .hello jlebon 16:37:14 <zodbot> jlebon: jlebon 'None' <jlebon@redhat.com> 16:37:26 <walters> .hello walters 16:37:26 <zodbot> walters: walters 'Colin Walters' <walters@redhat.com> 16:38:18 <dustymabe> welcome everyone :) 16:38:26 <dustymabe> #topic previous meeting action items 16:38:43 <dustymabe> from what I can tell there were no action items that were carried over from last meeting 16:39:15 <dustymabe> so we'll move forward 16:39:39 <dustymabe> #topic Using buildah in Atomic Host 16:39:45 <dustymabe> #link https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/402 16:40:10 <dustymabe> jberkus: welcome back - i think we discussed this last time when you were not here 16:40:42 <dustymabe> i think general concensus was: this seems like something that should be run in a container - 16:40:55 <dustymabe> but then also the question was raised... how big is it? 16:41:06 <dustymabe> it seems like it is 4M compressed and 12M uncompressed 16:41:12 <dustymabe> welcome unicell 16:41:28 * ashcrow nods 16:41:36 <dustymabe> #chair sanja jbrooks sayan ksinny ashcrow kushal strigazi jlebon walters unicell 16:41:36 <zodbot> Current chairs: ashcrow dustymabe jbrooks jlebon ksinny kushal sanja sayan strigazi unicell walters 16:41:50 <dustymabe> hmm did jberkus join? 16:42:12 <ashcrow> he did 16:42:23 <ashcrow> jberkus: ^^ 16:42:36 <dustymabe> ashcrow: I don't see him in roll call 16:42:44 <ashcrow> dustymabe: ah, I thought you meant did he join the channel 16:43:02 <unicell> dustymabe: o/ thanks 16:43:02 <dustymabe> haha i miss the start of the meeting by a few minutes and poof 16:43:24 <ashcrow> :-) 16:43:50 <sanja> hehehe 16:44:01 <ashcrow> My $0.02 is I think going the container route makes sense, especially if we decide to move docker and cri-o to containers as well 16:44:04 <dustymabe> anyone else have any comments on this ticket? 16:44:11 <ashcrow> 12M isn't much to add to the base, but still 16:44:22 <walters> i acutally haven't played with `buildah` enough - is including just that sufficient for workflows people use with it? 16:44:24 <ashcrow> I feel like we should move to making the base image smaller 16:44:24 <sanja> do you want me to fire it up next time if you're not here? I just wanted to wait 5 polite minutes basically 16:44:44 <dustymabe> walters: i'm not sure - I assume it's just a binary so no deps?? 16:44:48 <dustymabe> other than go 16:44:52 <dustymabe> well, not even that 16:44:55 <ashcrow> no deps 16:44:58 <sanja> +1 for the container route 16:45:01 <dustymabe> *static binary* 16:45:29 <walters> sorry, i meant like are there *other* tools that people commonly use with this even if the package itself doesn't actually `Requires:` them? 16:45:29 <dustymabe> sanja: sure - we usually work on in the channel who is going to run the meeting 16:45:52 <ashcrow> walters: not that come to mind. 16:45:55 <walters> e.g. some of the original usage I saw for buildah was using the host's package manager (`dnf`, `apt` etc.) 16:46:01 <dustymabe> walters: i'm guessing runc to run it once you build it? 16:46:08 <dustymabe> but probably nothing we don't already have in atomic host 16:46:10 <walters> though that doesn't seem to be the case in the current docs 16:46:18 <ashcrow> dustymabe: that's a better way of saying it :-) 16:46:35 <dustymabe> walters: that is true, that workflow might not work 16:46:42 <dustymabe> if it relies on *too much* in the host 16:46:57 <dustymabe> i imagine the most popular workflow would still be buildah bud Dockerfile 16:46:59 <ashcrow> Keep in mind that the buildah guys support running buildah in containers 16:47:08 <dustymabe> so basically do what docker does and use this dockerfile 16:47:11 <walters> yeah 16:47:47 <dustymabe> oh so if we decide to use a container, then we probably need to provide a container for people to use 16:48:07 <dustymabe> anyone want to take up that helm? 16:48:08 <walters> mmm, i dunno about that...i personally like installing rpms into a bigger tools container 16:48:39 <ashcrow> dustymabe: that's correct. While the buildah guys do support it I'm not sure if they have an official container image or not. 16:48:45 <ashcrow> walters: as in buildah + other tools? 16:48:55 <strigazi> dustymabe I can try packaging helm 16:48:55 <walters> right 16:48:57 <dustymabe> walters: i can see that - but I imagine the buildah container would require some special 'wiring' ? 16:49:13 <dustymabe> strigazi: :) helm was a figure of speech there 16:49:20 <dustymabe> wasn't referring to k8s helm 16:49:26 <dustymabe> but please do if you use it 16:49:39 <walters> true, @dwalsh did say it wanted `/var/lib/containers` mounted 16:50:17 <dustymabe> so if I create a ticket for creating a buildah container - is anyone interested in picking that work up? 16:50:33 <dustymabe> no one has to say yes here, but does make me more excited about creating the ticket if so 16:50:41 <ashcrow> dustymabe: I will do it if no one else is able to do it 16:50:51 <ashcrow> I have alot on my plate but it's important 16:50:58 <dustymabe> ashcrow: do you want to create the ticket too? and link the current topic ticket to it? 16:51:04 <ashcrow> dustymabe: sure 16:51:10 <dustymabe> ashcrow: feel free to farm it out if you can find another interested party 16:51:14 <ashcrow> dustymabe: will do 16:51:51 <dustymabe> #action ashcrow to create ticket for actually making a buildah container in fedora that we can recommend people use to build OCI images 16:52:16 <dustymabe> #topic Overhaul list of members, Quorum Rules 16:52:25 <dustymabe> #link https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/363 16:52:47 <dustymabe> we booted this one last time because jberkus wasn't around 16:53:09 <dustymabe> and it looks like jberkus gets spooked by late meetings so we are missing him this time too :( 16:53:34 <dustymabe> anyone with anything on this ticket ? 16:53:41 * dustymabe waits 16:53:54 <ashcrow> nothing really 16:54:06 <ashcrow> I think it needs jberkus unless sanja is up to speed with it already 16:54:53 <sanja> let me see 16:55:13 <sanja> let's move to next week's meeting for this 16:55:25 <dustymabe> yeah we'll move on 16:55:32 <jberkus> sorry, on conf call, readding back 16:55:59 <dustymabe> jberkus: kk 16:55:59 <sanja> and have a solution for it by then, then close the ticket 16:56:07 <jberkus> .hello jberkus 16:56:08 <zodbot> jberkus: jberkus 'Josh Berkus' <josh@agliodbs.com> 16:56:20 <jberkus> looks like the new membership quorum rules are approved 16:56:27 <jberkus> any reason not to just add them to the wiki? 16:56:59 <dustymabe> jberkus: not really - jberkus sanja? want to take an action item for that? 16:57:16 <dustymabe> keep in mind there are two proposals in that ticket 16:57:28 <dustymabe> membership proposal and voting proposal 16:57:35 <sanja> yes 16:57:37 <sanja> give it to me 16:57:45 <sanja> i'll add to the wiki then 16:58:02 <dustymabe> #action sanja to take membership proposal AND voting proposal from https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/363 and add them to the wiki and close ticket 16:58:11 <dustymabe> looks good? 16:58:20 <sanja> yes, both will be added to wiki, no? 16:58:28 <sanja> and old text deleted 16:58:35 <dustymabe> sounds good 16:58:40 <dustymabe> moving on.... 16:58:50 <dustymabe> #topic Decide strategy for including container runtimes in Atomic Host 16:58:55 <dustymabe> #link https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/360 16:58:56 <sanja> +1 16:59:05 <dustymabe> i think we can close this one 16:59:12 <dustymabe> jberkus: agree? 16:59:18 <jberkus> ye 16:59:38 <walters> i meant to say earlier this feels related to the `buildah` discussion 16:59:39 <jberkus> I mean, we'll revisit it for F28, but not until then 16:59:56 <ashcrow> Are we adding cri-o as well to base? 17:00:28 <dustymabe> I closed ticket 17:00:50 <dustymabe> jberkus: if we were going to 'revisit it for F28' we'd need to do that now since we are in the F28 devel cycle 17:00:55 <ashcrow> I feel that the result is clear for one runtime 17:00:57 <dustymabe> ashcrow: we never decided on that 17:01:06 <ashcrow> But not for runtimes 17:01:11 <dustymabe> ashcrow: fair 17:02:04 <dustymabe> i think I would be in favor of including crio, but would really like for it to not be *HUGE* 17:02:24 <dustymabe> so depending on the size that opinion could change 17:02:40 <dustymabe> anyone have any other thoughts about this discussion? 17:02:52 <ashcrow> I recommend we make a new issue specifically about cri-o then, and rename the closed one to be specific about docker 17:03:17 <jbrooks> I agree that it'd be nice to add crio if it wasn't too huge 17:03:21 <dustymabe> +1 to new issue 17:03:38 <dustymabe> -1 to renaming old issue, since the discussion in the ticket is broader 17:03:53 <dustymabe> just give a summary comment at the bottom and link to the new crio specific issue 17:04:07 <dustymabe> WDYT? 17:04:26 <ashcrow> WFM 17:04:31 <jberkus> er, sorry, F29 17:04:36 <ashcrow> I'll create the follow on issue 17:05:01 <dustymabe> if we were to add crio to the base does that have any implications for RHELAH/CAH? 17:05:28 <unicell> just wild thought, is it possible to include things like docker in different branch? 17:05:29 <dustymabe> i.e. is there any reason we *can't* add it there 17:05:33 <jbrooks> We can do different things than them 17:05:39 <jbrooks> like removing kube 17:05:44 <dustymabe> unicell: yes it is possible 17:05:54 <dustymabe> unicell: we've been careful with that approach so far 17:06:07 <dustymabe> because it become more maintenance 17:06:12 <jberkus> mostly, it's still a lot of effort for us to publish one tree 17:06:13 <dustymabe> and starts to get more confusing 17:06:40 <unicell> I see. Basically I was thinking something similar to install non-atomic os, one can choose different category, whether it is for virtualization or desktop use 17:06:41 <dustymabe> unicell: but if our tooling/testing get a lot better then that is something we could do in the future 17:06:53 <jberkus> also more contributors! 17:06:53 <unicell> I don't see that option with Atomic unless you build your own repo 17:07:11 <dustymabe> unicell: well, we have refs in our repos now 17:07:22 <dustymabe> so we could just build more 'branches' as you say with different package sets 17:07:39 <dustymabe> we also have the yet to be implemented idea of 'server side package layering' 17:07:43 <jbrooks> That'd be cool for sure 17:07:47 <dustymabe> so a common base and then branches on top of that 17:08:03 <dustymabe> i think these are all things that we can enable when other parts of what we do get better 17:08:09 <dustymabe> mainly automated testing 17:08:13 <dustymabe> and CI 17:08:18 <unicell> yep, I understand that requires more tooling and maintanence effort. Just brought it up and wanted know whether that has been an option 17:08:19 <unicell> sure 17:08:26 <dustymabe> anywho I think we've got things worked out for this issue for now 17:08:40 <dustymabe> #action ashcrow to create issue to specifically discuss adding crio to atomic host base image 17:08:56 <dustymabe> #topic open floor / news 17:09:00 <walters> the impact on the cloud images (in particular public cloud) is a bigger ripple though 17:09:27 <dustymabe> walters: that is true, unless we just ship the base and then people add on server side branches to fit their liking 17:09:43 <dustymabe> but that all comes back to 'what is appropriate in base' :) 17:09:54 <dustymabe> I have a few items for open floor 17:09:58 <dustymabe> anyone else? 17:10:29 <walters> just one random note, i'm continuing to work on [jigdo ♲📦](https://github.com/projectatomic/rpm-ostree/issues/1081) and it's going to unavoidably bring us to a model where we're at least downloading documentation (on the wire) 17:11:16 <walters> it's not a big deal...but it also feels weird to just discard it 17:11:23 <ashcrow> walters++ 17:11:32 <walters> at least we'll be closer to being able to easily have a flag to toggle it on though it'll involve redownloading everything 17:11:34 <dustymabe> walters: good to know. I'm still interested to know when you think jigdo is something that we want to start using in Fedora 17:11:45 <walters> (this is only for FAH obviously - FAW includes docs so it just makes sense) 17:12:01 <dustymabe> for one I really really wish we could still have a 'the ostree repo is the source of truth' model for jigdo 17:12:32 <dustymabe> so jigdo would be a complement to what we have today 17:12:44 <dustymabe> however, admins don't have to use it that way if they don't 17:12:46 <dustymabe> want to 17:13:13 <dustymabe> does that make any sense? 17:13:16 <walters> once the initial experimental client side lands i think we'll be able to flesh out more of that architecture design 17:13:53 <ksinny> Is it planned to get live in F28 or later? 17:14:06 <dustymabe> ksinny: i suspect post F28 17:14:19 <ksinny> dustymabe: okay! 17:14:22 <dustymabe> most of the F28 devel stuff is already in motion 17:14:32 <walters> i know what you mean yep, but let's try to discuss it in a focused meeting on it? 17:14:32 <dustymabe> for example change proposals were due yesterday I think 17:14:47 <dustymabe> walters: indeed. I think some dedicated time at devconf would be great for this 17:14:55 <walters> with more of releng involved in particular 17:15:01 <dustymabe> jberkus: do we have a 'working session' for the atomic WG at devconf that you know of ? 17:15:09 <walters> anyways i just wanted to drop that side note 17:15:23 <dustymabe> walters: thanks! 17:15:35 <ksinny> great work walters++ 17:15:35 <zodbot> ksinny: Karma for walters changed to 3 (for the f27 release cycle): https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any 17:15:48 <dustymabe> ok i have a few things for open floor 17:15:58 <dustymabe> #1 firewalld is getting closer to being in atomic host for f27 17:16:04 <dustymabe> it should be in today's rawhide build 17:16:09 <jberkus> dustymabe: nothing I submitted 17:16:40 <dustymabe> jberkus: we might find some time in the schedule and 'grab a room' if you think it would be useful, I do 17:17:12 <dustymabe> I'm going to do some tests with it in f27/rawhide to make sure I don't see any unexpected behavior and then we'll add it to the tree 17:17:26 <jberkus> dustymabe: not my decision anymore ;-) 17:17:30 <dustymabe> so firewalld may be in the next (or the next next) release of fedora atomic host 17:17:40 <dustymabe> trickling down to centos atomic host eventually 17:17:47 <dustymabe> it will be disabled by default 17:17:58 * dustymabe probably needs to make a separate blog post for this 17:17:59 <jberkus> sanja? ^^^ 17:19:01 <dustymabe> ok next thing I had 17:19:19 <dustymabe> we'll probably do another security release sometime soon for new fixes in the meltdown/spectre circus 17:19:23 <dustymabe> so look out for those 17:19:27 <sanja> yes 17:19:45 <dustymabe> and finally - anyone have any problems with any recent upgrades we have put out? 17:19:51 <dustymabe> war stories from the road? 17:20:58 <sanja> 1. not on my side and 2. regarding separate blog post yes please, disabled by default and added gotta be documented in the docs as well, so seems I gotta put that there 17:21:27 <dustymabe> sanja: :) 17:21:34 <dustymabe> i had too many streams going 17:22:00 <dustymabe> he was asking you about this: dustymabe | jberkus: we might find some time in the schedule and 'grab a room' if you think it would be useful, I do 17:22:07 <dustymabe> i.e. at devconf 17:22:40 <dustymabe> sanja: let's talk after the meeting 17:22:51 <dustymabe> ok anyone else with anything from open floor? 17:22:56 <dustymabe> ksinny: jbrooks ? 17:23:04 <dustymabe> I know there was a new CAH release out there? 17:23:05 <jbrooks> No items from me 17:23:07 * ksinny adds a note that she has started working on enabling FAH on s390x (on local machine) 17:23:12 <jbrooks> Oh, there is 17:23:39 <jberkus> wait, there still are s390s? 17:23:40 <dustymabe> ksinny: wow++ 17:23:53 <ksinny> jberkus: yup 17:24:24 <ksinny> 64bit version only 17:25:14 <dustymabe> nice 17:25:26 <walters> ksinny: 👍 in a LPAR or vm? 17:25:26 <dustymabe> ok if no one has anything else we can close in a few minutes 17:25:43 <ksinny> walters: z/vm 17:26:03 <ksinny> walters: virt-install works fine on tope of z/vm, tried on F27 17:26:20 <walters> one thing related to this is AIUI historically the specialness of s390 is where regressions in e.g. dracut tend to show up 17:27:22 <ashcrow> My brain read that as :+1: in a LARP or vm 17:27:41 <dustymabe> ok closing out :) 17:27:44 <dustymabe> #endmeeting