17:00:23 <geppetto> #startmeeting fpc 17:00:23 <zodbot> Meeting started Thu Jan 19 17:00:23 2023 UTC. 17:00:23 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location. 17:00:23 <zodbot> The chair is geppetto. Information about MeetBot at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Zodbot#Meeting_Functions. 17:00:23 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 17:00:23 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fpc' 17:00:24 <geppetto> #meetingname fpc 17:00:24 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fpc' 17:00:24 <geppetto> #topic Roll Call 17:00:52 <mhroncok> I am somewhat around if you need me 17:00:58 <carlwgeorge> .hi 17:00:59 <zodbot> carlwgeorge: carlwgeorge 'Carl George' <carl@redhat.com> 17:01:04 <geppetto> #chair carlwgeorge 17:01:04 <zodbot> Current chairs: carlwgeorge geppetto 17:01:13 <geppetto> mhroncok: Want to be chair'd? 17:09:19 <GwynCieslasheher> here 17:09:28 <geppetto> #chair GwynCieslasheher 17:09:28 <zodbot> Current chairs: GwynCieslasheher carlwgeorge geppetto 17:09:44 <geppetto> #topic Open Floor 17:10:00 <geppetto> Anyone have anything to discuss? 17:10:31 <geppetto> Issues/PRs tagged with meeting haven't changed since last year 17:11:44 <carlwgeorge> i just had something come up i wanted to run by yall 17:11:52 <carlwgeorge> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-immutables/pull-request/2 17:13:08 <carlwgeorge> tldr, license guidelines say rust packages' license field should reflect all statically compiled code. if that's appropriate for rust, why not all packages, e.g. golang and header-only static libs? 17:14:27 <geppetto> I think it's important that rust can do this automaticaly 17:15:04 <mhroncok> I think this should be required, but it practice might be kinda hard 17:15:05 <geppetto> Like I'd be fine saying go should also do it, if that can also be produced automatically 17:16:01 <geppetto> But random C code being expected to deep copy all the license info for everything static seems like it's asking a lot. 17:16:45 <mhroncok> are there packages with many -sttaic BRs? 17:17:00 <mhroncok> I'd expect usually to see around one 17:17:03 <geppetto> ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 17:17:19 <carlwgeorge> i see 749 of them 17:17:22 <mhroncok> inspecting the one package and modifyign the lciense accordingly should be easy 17:17:32 <mhroncok> also perhaps legal should decide this instead of FPC? 17:17:39 <mhroncok> carlwgeorge: in one spec? 17:17:52 <mhroncok> or total in Fedora? 17:17:54 <carlwgeorge> oh no i thought you meant how many packages have static brs 17:18:13 <mhroncok> I've meant how many static BRs an usual package has 17:18:20 <carlwgeorge> and some of those are in the same spec, i just did a grep count for 'BuildRequires:.*static' through all fedora specs 17:18:24 <mhroncok> I'd say 0 the most, obviously 17:18:34 <mhroncok> but other than that, I've onyl ever seen 1 17:19:08 <geppetto> Yeh, I'd expect mostly it was 1 (if not zero) 17:19:15 <mhroncok> cabal-rpm requires several 17:19:17 <carlwgeorge> it seems ghc stuff tends to have a few 17:19:28 <mhroncok> lot of ghc packages do 17:20:27 <carlwgeorge> i was surprised to see the rust guideline on that. it makes sense, but like y'all said it's harder for other software, and if we do it for rust we should do it for everything. 17:20:31 <mhroncok> anyway, isnpecting ~10 static deps once is not a big deal IMHO 17:20:43 <carlwgeorge> either all or nothing imo 17:20:49 <mhroncok> or at least we should allow and encourage it 17:20:52 <mhroncok> if not require 17:21:29 <carlwgeorge> i already know of packagers that knowingly ignore the current bundled license guidelines because "it's too hard" 17:22:29 <mhroncok> i already know of packagers that knowingly ignore any guidelines because "it's too hard" 17:22:46 <mhroncok> :/ 17:24:06 <carlwgeorge> should we file an issue then with fedora legal to get a decision on this? 17:24:52 <mhroncok> +1 17:25:01 <geppetto> I guess 17:25:13 <geppetto> I just assume legal are going to say "yes, do things" 17:25:31 <carlwgeorge> i can do that, i'll be the bad guy that ruins the fun for golang packagers not doing this 17:25:49 * geppetto nods 17:25:58 <geppetto> Anything else anyone wants to talk about? 17:26:00 <carlwgeorge> which includes myself 17:26:29 <mhroncok> carlwgeorge: you can also be the good guy who write a tool that does this 17:26:40 <geppetto> +1 17:26:53 <mhroncok> assuming License is repoqueryable 17:27:16 <mhroncok> 1) get -stativc BRs 2) query their licesne 3) assemble a comment and the final license tag 17:27:22 <carlwgeorge> i can try (no promises). will have to look at the approach rust stuff takes. 17:27:25 <mhroncok> 4) profit? :) 17:27:47 <geppetto> 2.5) query their -static deps too? 17:28:18 * carlwgeorge 's head explodes 17:29:28 <mhroncok> geppetto: no need, their license tag already includes that (in ideal world) 17:29:30 <geppetto> Have fun :) … anyway will close and give you all 30m back. 17:29:52 <carlwgeorge> i had something else, but completely forgot what it was 17:29:59 <carlwgeorge> will have to wait for next time 17:30:02 * geppetto nods 17:30:10 <geppetto> #endmeeting