18:00:04 <smooge> #startmeeting Fedora Infrastructure Ops Daily Standup Meeting
18:00:04 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed Apr 15 18:00:04 2020 UTC.
18:00:04 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
18:00:04 <zodbot> The chair is smooge. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
18:00:04 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
18:00:04 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fedora_infrastructure_ops_daily_standup_meeting'
18:00:04 <smooge> #chair cverna mboddu nirik smooge
18:00:04 <zodbot> Current chairs: cverna mboddu nirik smooge
18:00:04 <smooge> #meetingname fedora_infrastructure_ops_daily_standup_meeting
18:00:04 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fedora_infrastructure_ops_daily_standup_meeting'
18:00:04 <smooge> #info meeting is 30 minutes MAX. At the end of 30, its stops
18:00:04 <smooge> #info agenda is at https://board.net/p/fedora-infra-daily
18:00:05 <smooge> #topic Tickets needing review
18:00:07 <smooge> #info https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issues?status=Open&priority=1
18:00:10 <nirik> morning
18:00:13 <smooge> Hello fellow robots
18:00:17 <smooge> and humans
18:00:25 <nirik> I am a meat popcycle.
18:00:33 <cverna> Hi o/
18:00:44 <mboddu> Hello...
18:00:59 <nirik> there was one ticket in needs review that was private. I just moved it to waiting on assignee.
18:01:13 <nirik> and thats all the new ones in infra. Should we look at releng?
18:01:27 <mboddu> Now I want to have a *normal* popsicle :)
18:01:29 <nirik> nothing much new there.
18:01:31 <cverna> +1
18:01:42 <mboddu> No new tickets over there as well
18:02:05 <cverna> do we want to do the weekly backlog email for releng ?
18:02:14 <mboddu> Sure
18:02:17 <nirik> we could sure.
18:02:24 * cverna is happy to do it
18:02:37 <nirik> I had a few tickets to discuss...
18:02:41 <mboddu> I am actually going through them yesterday and closed few of them
18:02:59 <smooge> is here to help out for once
18:03:17 <nirik> .ticket 8702
18:03:18 <zodbot> nirik: Issue #8702: Renew or Retire Certificate for *.id.fedoraproject.org - fedora-infrastructure - Pagure.io - https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/8702
18:03:19 <nirik> .ticket 8703
18:03:21 <zodbot> nirik: Issue #8703: Renew or Retire Certificate for *.stg.id.fedoraproject.org - fedora-infrastructure - Pagure.io - https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/8703
18:03:30 <nirik> are those done smooge ? or were pending on something?
18:03:44 <fm-admin> pagure.issue.edit -- smooge edited the close_status and status fields of ticket fedora-infrastructure#8702 https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/8702
18:03:45 <fm-admin> pagure.issue.comment.added -- smooge commented on ticket fedora-infrastructure#8702: "Renew or Retire Certificate for *.id.fedoraproject.org" https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/8702#comment-642362
18:04:07 <smooge> stg isn't done yet
18:04:19 <smooge> should go do that
18:04:27 <fm-admin> pagure.issue.assigned.added -- smooge assigned ticket fedora-infrastructure#8703 to smooge https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/8703
18:04:40 <nirik> .ticket 8707
18:04:41 <zodbot> nirik: Issue #8707: Find all old retired components in bugzilla and mark them 'closed to new bugs' - fedora-infrastructure - Pagure.io - https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/8707
18:04:47 <nirik> I think thats actuall a dupe of
18:04:54 <nirik> .ticket 7639
18:04:55 <zodbot> nirik: Issue #7639: please remove retired packages from bugzilla components list - fedora-infrastructure - Pagure.io - https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/7639
18:05:22 <nirik> do you all agree?
18:05:41 <cverna> yes they look similar to me
18:06:29 <mboddu> Yes, seems duplicate for me
18:06:46 <nirik> ok, lets close that as a dupe then
18:07:26 <fm-admin> pagure.issue.edit -- kevin edited the close_status and status fields of ticket fedora-infrastructure#8707 https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/8707
18:07:27 <fm-admin> pagure.issue.comment.added -- kevin commented on ticket fedora-infrastructure#8707: "Find all old retired components in bugzilla and mark them 'closed to new bugs' " https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/8707#comment-642365
18:08:22 <nirik> I thought I had one more, but can't think of it now... let me see.
18:08:43 <nirik> .ticket 8279
18:08:44 <zodbot> nirik: Issue #8279: Current status and future of jenkins-continuous-infra and dist-git tests infra - fedora-infrastructure - Pagure.io - https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/8279
18:08:59 <nirik> perhaps we should close this and tell them to reopen if there's work for us to still do?
18:09:24 <cverna> +1
18:10:23 <nirik> .ticket 8248
18:10:24 <zodbot> nirik: Issue #8248: MTS is now running in prod in dry_run mode - fedora-infrastructure - Pagure.io - https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/8248
18:10:45 <nirik> unclear who we should ask here or who is driving this service...
18:11:07 <nirik> mboddu: you have any ideas here? should we ask sgallagh or ?
18:11:14 <cverna> Yeah :(
18:11:30 * mboddu reading the ticket now
18:12:13 <sgallagh> I think it should be under mikem's group now
18:12:30 <mboddu> nirik: So, currently we tag the module builds based on their build requirements which is bad and MTS should fix it
18:13:02 <mboddu> But I think MTS was designed for more complex tagging structure
18:13:10 <sgallagh> This will help for some special cases like the maven one we just manually did recently
18:13:11 <nirik> ok. do we know what tagging rules we should have?
18:13:23 <rpbarlow> nirik: the only rule is… TAG, YOU'RE IT!
18:13:35 <nirik> so we do want to probibly push it to prod and then come up with rules?
18:14:45 <mboddu> Well, in Fedora if the Build gets tagged based on the runtime platform requirement that should solve our problems
18:15:10 <mboddu> But I am not aware of any other corner cases
18:15:18 <mboddu> If there are any
18:15:36 <nirik> ok
18:15:50 <nirik> then I guess we leave that ticket to track moving this to prod for now?
18:16:13 <sgallagh> Theoretically, this would also allows us to tag certain streams to go straight to stable if approved.
18:16:36 <sgallagh> (Such as streams that might be perpetually experimental and breakage is acceptable)
18:17:29 <smooge> nirik, I think so.. any other tickets for people?
18:18:00 <mboddu> I am not sure if we really want that, it might confuse people
18:18:02 <nirik> let me see... just a sec.
18:18:06 <mboddu> I have
18:18:08 <mboddu> one
18:18:17 <mboddu> But I can wait
18:18:52 <nirik> .ticket 8157
18:18:54 <zodbot> nirik: Issue #8157: ansible: enable ansible-report as a hook - fedora-infrastructure - Pagure.io - https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/8157
18:18:57 <nirik> what did we decide to do here?
18:19:34 <cverna> I think we should just close it :(
18:19:47 <cverna> It did not seems easy to implement
18:20:13 <nirik> ok. ;(
18:20:39 <nirik> That again makes me wonder about just moving our ansible repo to pagure even if we have to move it again...
18:20:46 <cverna> We can revisit when we have PRs maybe one day 🙂
18:21:41 <nirik> yeah, thats what makes me think about it.
18:21:57 <cverna> Yeah if we move or when we move will be in a while
18:22:17 <smooge> I would suggest moving before the move
18:22:27 <smooge> if that makes sense
18:22:42 <smooge> aka move to pagure before June outage
18:22:43 <cverna> :)
18:22:55 <nirik> well, we could yeah... but then we may have to move to gitlab later.
18:23:03 <nirik> but perhaps we don't care.
18:23:24 <nirik> there is also the private repo to consider. unless we move to that thing centos uses.
18:23:42 * cverna does not have strong opinion
18:23:59 <smooge> honestly we will have to move again in 3 to 4 years for some other reason
18:24:26 * nirik will ponder on it and put forth some plan
18:24:35 <nirik> mboddu: you had a ticket/issue?
18:24:55 <mboddu> Yes
18:25:02 <mboddu> .releng 9154
18:25:03 <zodbot> mboddu: Issue #9154: F32 Change: new buildroot for CPU baseline update and F33 Change: ELN Compose - releng - Pagure.io - https://pagure.io/releng/issue/9154
18:25:20 <mboddu> I think the change request is approved
18:25:51 <nirik> yep.
18:26:15 <nirik> do we have all the info we need?
18:26:24 <mboddu> I think so
18:26:26 * sgallagh is here if the answer is "no"
18:26:48 <mboddu> sgallagh: Ah nice, so, the signing, do you need it?
18:26:51 <cverna> what do we need to do then ?
18:27:16 <mboddu> cverna: If they need signing, then a FBR to robosig config  change
18:27:43 <nirik> and we need to set up all the koji stuff.
18:27:44 <sgallagh> mboddu: Yes, please
18:28:04 <mboddu> sgallagh: Okay, it will be using f33 key
18:28:07 <cverna> We could try to use ansible :)
18:28:31 <nirik> cverna: sure, it's possibly pretty complex, but we could try that in staging...
18:28:32 <mboddu> nirik: Right, anything else am I missing and that might affect the freeze?
18:29:05 <nirik> mboddu: some other koji config probibly... like koji-gc rules for it and such
18:29:07 <mboddu> cverna: Also, the changes are simple and a one time thing, I think koji-ansible might be a overkill for it
18:29:19 * cverna is happy to help
18:29:24 <nirik> and can we set it in stg first and get sgallagh to check it to make sure we are on the same page?
18:29:36 <mboddu> sgallagh: ^ ?
18:29:55 <sgallagh> I'll ask him.
18:29:59 <sgallagh> Yeah, he says that's fine :)
18:30:22 <cverna> :)
18:30:24 <mboddu> sgallagh: You should have changed the nick and it would be more funnier :)
18:30:40 <nirik> ok, we are at the end of our time... :)
18:30:45 <nirik> thanks for coming everyone!
18:30:46 <mboddu> yeah, thats all I got
18:31:20 <cverna> thanks all
18:31:40 <nirik> #endmeeting