18:00:12 #startmeeting Fedora Infrastructure Ops Daily Standup Meeting 18:00:12 Meeting started Thu Jul 16 18:00:12 2020 UTC. 18:00:12 This meeting is logged and archived in a public location. 18:00:12 The chair is nirik. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 18:00:12 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 18:00:12 The meeting name has been set to 'fedora_infrastructure_ops_daily_standup_meeting' 18:00:12 #chair pingou mboddu nirik smooge 18:00:12 #meetingname fedora_infrastructure_ops_daily_standup_meeting 18:00:12 Current chairs: mboddu nirik pingou smooge 18:00:12 The meeting name has been set to 'fedora_infrastructure_ops_daily_standup_meeting' 18:00:12 #info meeting is 30 minutes MAX. At the end of 30, its stops 18:00:12 #info agenda is at https://board.net/p/fedora-infra-daily 18:00:13 #topic Tickets needing review 18:00:15 #info https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issues?status=Open&priority=1 18:00:25 I am here 18:00:34 hum, pagure down? 18:02:28 restarted it 18:02:40 .ticket 9144 18:02:41 nirik: Issue #9144: Remove TOTP token for mohamed94 - fedora-infrastructure - Pagure.io - https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/9144 18:02:51 I can do it, now that I know :D 18:03:09 low, low, groomed 18:03:15 cool. ack 18:03:36 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 pagure.issue.assigned.added -- mohanboddu assigned ticket fedora-infrastructure#9144 to mohanboddu https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/9144 18:03:46 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 thats it on infra side... 18:03:52 anything on releng? 18:03:54 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 Well, I need help with one ticket 18:04:43 .releng 9602 18:04:44 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 nirik: Its a dns failure 18:05:42 But do you know why is that? 18:05:47 huh. this is from your machine? or ? 18:06:03 or bodhi-backend01? 18:06:04 Nope, from bodhi-backend01.iad2.fp.o 18:07:07 so, in your ~/.sigul/client.conf... in the client section you need the bridge and vault names 18:07:39 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 ok, thats not it. will have to dig more... 18:08:31 nirik: https://docs.pagure.org/releng/sop_sigul_client_setup.html?highlight=sigul#configuration but with iad2, is that right? 18:09:27 yes, but 01 on both. 18:10:33 ah, no. 18:11:41 nirik: on the releng front, did you see my ping on https://pagure.io/releng/pull-request/7119 ? 18:12:19 mboddu: ah, you want: 18:12:21 bridge-hostname: sign-bridge.iad2.fedoraproject.org 18:12:21 server-hostname: sign-vault.iad2.fedoraproject.org 18:13:04 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 nirik: I will give it a shot 18:13:37 mboddu: that works for me on bodhi-backend01 18:13:56 pingou: I would like to merge it, so I am +1 with the your updated content 18:15:12 ok, any other ones to discuss? pingou you had something? or that was the thing? ;) 18:15:14 mboddu: https://pagure.io/releng/pull-request/9606 18:15:21 nirik: no I still have 18:15:31 it's a administrative question 18:15:39 we have two tags in the infra repo: groomed and backlog 18:15:48 it sounds to me that they overlap in meaning 18:16:04 did we forgot about the first one when we introduced the second one? 18:16:11 or do they have different meaning 18:16:14 well...yeah... 18:16:37 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 but I'd be ok dropping one or the other... or both in favor of 'ready' or something 18:17:11 triaged? 18:17:16 ready? 18:17:37 having learning the other meaning of groomed, I'm not very fond of that one 18:17:53 so I was thinking backlog but I wasn't sure if it meant something 18:18:00 nirik++ signing worked 18:18:05 mboddu++ 18:18:09 cool. 18:18:18 yeah, I'm ok dropping groomed. Feel the same way. 18:18:31 the question came up also at the EU stand up today about the ticket that do not have tages 18:18:51 I believe most of them are "blocked" 18:18:53 oh yeah, I suppose I should join where that is so I can look back at it. 18:19:07 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 it's in #centos-meeting 18:19:12 I don't think so, but I could be wrong. 18:19:28 https://www.centos.org/minutes/2020/July/centos-meeting.2020-07-16-08.36.html the log 18:19:40 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 pagure.issue.assigned.added -- pingou assigned ticket fedora-infrastructure#8517 to pingou https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/8517 18:21:16 ah yeah, thats been a long one... 18:21:43 I might try and run thu tickets tomorrow some... 18:21:44 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 nice. 18:22:02 pingou++ 18:22:12 nirik: I'm thinking to kick off a thread on the infra list about the state/flow for our tickets 18:22:39 sure, happy to adjust. I think we have actually been making good process in the last few months. 18:22:48 there's definitely improvements we can make tho 18:23:13 starting at "needs review" -> "waiting on assignee" -> "backlog/triaged/ready" -> "trouble/gain" 18:23:49 pingou++ lgtm 18:24:01 nirik: I agree and I don't want to change or review it, more document it 18:24:07 sure. 18:24:20 so the EU stand up also have the keys to read the ticket queue 18:24:25 possibly also updating https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/cpe/day_to_day_fedora/ 18:24:29 +1 18:24:35 that was what I had in mind 18:24:56 which we should also push more (add to oncall, put in the new ticket template, etc) 18:24:59 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 sure, or we also have a placeholder for the centos side in there, can merge or make a seperate one, etc. 18:25:41 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 :) 18:25:59 so, quickly... mboddu: can you rebase and merge https://pagure.io/fedora-infra/ansible/pull-request/73 18:26:12 thank you for flying "fedora-infra/releng" :] 18:26:25 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 nirik: Sur 18:27:14 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 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 nirik: the later 18:28:40 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 oh... customised new issue would be nice. 18:29:07 shouldn't be too hard since we have the logic for new PRs 18:29:45 nice. 18:29:56 anything else from anyone? we are almost at time... 18:30:50 all good for me 18:31:44 cool. Thanks everyon 18:31:46 #endmeeting