18:00:12 <nirik> #startmeeting Fedora Infrastructure Ops Daily Standup Meeting
18:00:12 <zodbot> Meeting started Thu Jul 16 18:00:12 2020 UTC.
18:00:12 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
18:00:12 <zodbot> The chair is nirik. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
18:00:12 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
18:00:12 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fedora_infrastructure_ops_daily_standup_meeting'
18:00:12 <nirik> #chair pingou mboddu nirik smooge
18:00:12 <nirik> #meetingname fedora_infrastructure_ops_daily_standup_meeting
18:00:12 <zodbot> Current chairs: mboddu nirik pingou smooge
18:00:12 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fedora_infrastructure_ops_daily_standup_meeting'
18:00:12 <nirik> #info meeting is 30 minutes MAX. At the end of 30, its stops
18:00:12 <nirik> #info agenda is at https://board.net/p/fedora-infra-daily
18:00:13 <nirik> #topic Tickets needing review
18:00:15 <nirik> #info https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issues?status=Open&priority=1
18:00:25 <mboddu> I am here
18:00:34 <nirik> hum, pagure down?
18:02:28 <nirik> restarted it
18:02:40 <nirik> .ticket 9144
18:02:41 <zodbot> nirik: Issue #9144: Remove TOTP token for mohamed94 - fedora-infrastructure - Pagure.io - https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/9144
18:02:51 <mboddu> I can do it, now that I know :D
18:03:09 <mboddu> low, low, groomed
18:03:15 <nirik> cool. ack
18:03:36 <fm-admin> pagure.issue.tag.added -- mohanboddu tagged ticket fedora-infrastructure#9144: groomed, low-gain, and low-trouble https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/9144
18:03:37 <fm-admin> pagure.issue.assigned.added -- mohanboddu assigned ticket fedora-infrastructure#9144 to mohanboddu https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/9144
18:03:46 <fm-admin> pagure.issue.comment.added -- mohanboddu commented on ticket fedora-infrastructure#9144: "Remove TOTP token for mohamed94" https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/9144#comment-665806
18:03:49 <nirik> thats it on infra side...
18:03:52 <nirik> anything on releng?
18:03:54 <fm-admin> pagure.issue.comment.edited -- mohanboddu edited a comment on ticket fedora-infrastructure#9144: "Remove TOTP token for mohamed94" https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/9144#comment-665806
18:04:12 <mboddu> Well, I need help with one ticket
18:04:43 <mboddu> .releng 9602
18:04:44 <zodbot> mboddu: Issue #9602: Create detached signatures for the Ignition 2.4.0 release - releng - Pagure.io - https://pagure.io/releng/issue/9602
18:05:34 <mboddu> nirik: Its a dns failure
18:05:42 <mboddu> But do you know why is that?
18:05:47 <nirik> huh. this is from your machine? or ?
18:06:03 <nirik> or bodhi-backend01?
18:06:04 <mboddu> Nope, from bodhi-backend01.iad2.fp.o
18:07:07 <nirik> so, in your ~/.sigul/client.conf... in the client section you need the bridge and vault names
18:07:39 <mboddu> nirik: Okay, I think I have them somewhere in the docs
18:07:40 * mboddu looks
18:07:54 * pingou has one question for the open-floor
18:08:23 <nirik> ok, thats not it. will have to dig more...
18:08:31 <mboddu> nirik: https://docs.pagure.org/releng/sop_sigul_client_setup.html?highlight=sigul#configuration but with iad2, is that right?
18:09:27 <nirik> yes, but 01 on both.
18:10:33 <nirik> ah, no.
18:11:41 <pingou> nirik: on the releng front, did you see my ping on https://pagure.io/releng/pull-request/7119 ?
18:12:19 <nirik> mboddu: ah, you want:
18:12:21 <nirik> bridge-hostname: sign-bridge.iad2.fedoraproject.org
18:12:21 <nirik> server-hostname: sign-vault.iad2.fedoraproject.org
18:13:04 <nirik> pingou: yeah, just haven't gotten to replying yet. I suppose it's still of interest... if you want to update it cool. if not, I'd be fine closing it since we lived without it for rthat long
18:13:22 <mboddu> nirik: I will give it a shot
18:13:37 <nirik> mboddu: that works for me on bodhi-backend01
18:13:56 <mboddu> pingou: I would like to merge it, so I am +1 with the your updated content
18:15:12 <nirik> ok, any other ones to discuss? pingou you had something? or that was the thing? ;)
18:15:14 <pingou> mboddu: https://pagure.io/releng/pull-request/9606
18:15:21 <pingou> nirik: no I still have
18:15:31 <pingou> it's a administrative question
18:15:39 <pingou> we have two tags in the infra repo: groomed and backlog
18:15:48 <pingou> it sounds to me that they overlap in meaning
18:16:04 <pingou> did we forgot about the first one when we introduced the second one?
18:16:11 <pingou> or do they have different meaning
18:16:14 <nirik> well...yeah...
18:16:37 <nirik> the backlog we added when we were trying to go thru and groom the backlog... so we would do 5 old tickets a week...
18:17:00 <nirik> but I'd be ok dropping one or the other... or both in favor of 'ready' or something
18:17:11 <pingou> triaged?
18:17:16 <pingou> ready?
18:17:37 <pingou> having learning the other meaning of groomed, I'm not very fond of that one
18:17:53 <pingou> so I was thinking backlog but I wasn't sure if it meant something
18:18:00 <mboddu> nirik++ signing worked
18:18:05 <pingou> mboddu++
18:18:09 <nirik> cool.
18:18:18 <nirik> yeah, I'm ok dropping groomed. Feel the same way.
18:18:31 <pingou> the question came up also at the EU stand up today about the ticket that do not have tages
18:18:51 <pingou> I believe most of them are "blocked"
18:18:53 <nirik> oh yeah, I suppose I should join where that is so I can look back at it.
18:19:07 <mboddu> I feel like we can still use backlog as something that has been stuck at working and probably ready to get closed if no interest
18:19:09 <pingou> it's in #centos-meeting
18:19:12 <nirik> I don't think so, but I could be wrong.
18:19:28 <pingou> https://www.centos.org/minutes/2020/July/centos-meeting.2020-07-16-08.36.html the log
18:19:40 <nirik> most of them are old where they are high trouble and low gain I suspect.
18:20:47 * pingou needs to finish https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/8517
18:20:53 <fm-admin> pagure.issue.assigned.added -- pingou assigned ticket fedora-infrastructure#8517 to pingou https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/8517
18:21:16 <nirik> ah yeah, thats been a long one...
18:21:43 <nirik> I might try and run thu tickets tomorrow some...
18:21:44 <pingou> they are gone from the list, I just need to clear them from the DB so they don't come back w/o us noticing
18:21:59 <nirik> nice.
18:22:02 <nirik> pingou++
18:22:12 <pingou> nirik: I'm thinking to kick off a thread on the infra list about the state/flow for our tickets
18:22:39 <nirik> sure, happy to adjust. I think we have actually been making good process in the last few months.
18:22:48 <nirik> there's definitely improvements we can make tho
18:23:13 <pingou> starting at "needs review" -> "waiting on assignee" -> "backlog/triaged/ready" -> "trouble/gain"
18:23:49 <mboddu> pingou++ lgtm
18:24:01 <pingou> nirik: I agree and I don't want to change or review it, more document it
18:24:07 <nirik> sure.
18:24:20 <pingou> so the EU stand up also have the keys to read the ticket queue
18:24:25 <nirik> possibly also updating https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/cpe/day_to_day_fedora/
18:24:29 <pingou> +1
18:24:35 <pingou> that was what I had in mind
18:24:56 <nirik> which we should also push more (add to oncall, put in the new ticket template, etc)
18:24:59 <pingou> and we could also propose this to the centos side of the team to see if that fits them as well or if they'd like to make some changes to this
18:25:25 <nirik> sure, or we also have a placeholder for the centos side in there, can merge or make a seperate one, etc.
18:25:41 <pingou> I was thinking of a toddler that would comment on new ticket: "Thanks for filling this ticket, if you are now already aware here is the flow your ticket may go through" kinda thing
18:25:57 <pingou> :)
18:25:59 <nirik> so, quickly... mboddu: can you rebase and merge https://pagure.io/fedora-infra/ansible/pull-request/73
18:26:12 <pingou> thank you for flying "fedora-infra/releng" :]
18:26:25 <nirik> pingou: could be ok, but seems a little complex... having in the template so they know what to expect when filing might be better...
18:26:33 <mboddu> nirik: Sur
18:27:14 <nirik> pingou: on https://pagure.io/fedora-infra/ansible/pull-request/116 FWIW, tflink said that was a pretty simple change... do we want to just merge it? or keep waiting on finding out about resultsdb long term?
18:27:29 <pingou> pagure has a way to customize the new PR page, maybe I should look at customizing the new issue page as well :D
18:27:33 <pingou> nirik: the later
18:28:40 <nirik> mboddu: https://pagure.io/fedora-infra/ansible/pull-request/127 can you change that pr per the last comment or argue for why not? :)
18:28:52 <nirik> oh... customised new issue would be nice.
18:29:07 <pingou> shouldn't be too hard since we have the logic for new PRs
18:29:45 <nirik> nice.
18:29:56 <nirik> anything else from anyone? we are almost at time...
18:30:50 <pingou> all good for me
18:31:44 <nirik> cool. Thanks everyon
18:31:46 <nirik> #endmeeting