15:34:59 #startmeeting Fedora CI SIG 15:34:59 Meeting started Wed Nov 6 15:34:59 2019 UTC. 15:34:59 This meeting is logged and archived in a public location. 15:34:59 The chair is bookwar. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:34:59 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 15:34:59 The meeting name has been set to 'fedora_ci_sig' 15:35:10 #topic Init 15:35:14 .hello2 15:35:15 bookwar: bookwar 'Aleksandra Fedorova' 15:35:16 .hello2 15:35:18 tflink: tflink 'Tim Flink' 15:36:04 .hello2 15:36:07 fbo: fbo 'Fabien Boucher' 15:36:10 .hello2 15:36:11 bgoncalv: bgoncalv 'Bruno Goncalves' 15:36:21 .hello2 15:36:21 .hello2 15:36:22 msrb: msrb 'Michal Srb' 15:36:25 mvadkert: mvadkert 'None' 15:36:27 dcantrell: will yo join? 15:36:28 woot 15:36:39 I'm here 15:36:46 cool, let's get started 15:36:51 .hello2 15:36:52 dcantrell: Sorry, but you don't exist 15:36:57 alright, whatever 15:37:03 #topic Agenda doc 15:37:30 i was thinking, wouldn't it be nice to have a place where you can put topics before the meeting 15:37:56 so it is not just me who tries to bring topics but everyone can contribute 15:38:13 dcantrell: .hello2 only works when your fas id matches your irc nick, aren't yours different? 15:38:42 bookwar: sounds reasonable 15:38:49 tflink: yes, they are. my FAS account matches my RH account which was created in a time period where account names were restricted to 8 characters because of oracle 15:38:53 i don't know the better place for it, so i created the doc in the gnome etherpad: https://etherpad.gnome.org/p/fedora-ci# 15:39:07 tflink: wanting to keep life simple, I just used that username everywhere 15:39:12 if you like the idea, then just start using it, any other ideas are welcome too 15:40:08 for today it is not filled with details, so i am just going to go through the topics randomly anyway, but for next time, let's try it 15:40:14 bookwar: maybe taiga has also something, but etherpad is nice 15:40:29 any questions on this part? 15:40:49 moving on 15:40:51 #topic Zuul update 15:41:03 fbo: your turn ) 15:41:29 thanks 15:42:03 so not so much, I have been working on adding a functional test on a package that use the zuul workflow 15:42:19 That can be used later as a showcase 15:42:27 let me find the link 15:42:59 https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/fbo/rpms/nodepool/c/57204ace65a794c122409173b60d3db320afb780 15:43:23 So the entry point is standard like for Standart test interface of Fedora 15:43:58 but it shows that we can use both on the Zuul CI (test with STI or w/o) 15:44:34 so it doesn't use the roles, only the STI interface aka tests.yaml 15:45:19 yes it does not use the roles 15:45:40 anything else? 15:46:00 fbo: yeah, those are basically then ansible tests ... maybe it would be nice to expose results.yml 15:46:16 fbo: so it generates results in the expected format, although in fedora nothing yet consumes them 15:46:44 mvadkert: yes we can easily add an ARA report on top 15:47:09 fbo: that is also an solution :) 15:47:13 we already do that in another CI contect on top of Zuul 15:47:21 fbo: it is different i think, mvadkert was mentioning the https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/ci/standard-test-interface/#_results_format 15:47:36 it is a part of STI spec 15:48:25 let's move to next thing 15:48:26 well keep in mind this is not the STI 15:48:41 Also from my side 15:49:00 I don't know how to move forward with https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/8320 15:49:19 Kevin found that's maybe a DNS issue on src.f.o 15:49:29 pingou: ^ any comments? 15:50:06 but it make the system based on Zuul mostly un-usable as it work half the time 15:50:46 #info https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/8320 still has a heavy impact on reliability of Zuul 15:51:08 yeah, we should escalate that, we do not monitor much issues like this in Fedora CI pipeline bgoncalv ? 15:51:09 so it makes me hesitate talking more about the Zuul worklow ... 15:51:23 fbo:i'll mention it in the meeting notes again, but we need pingou and others to comeent on that 15:51:30 let's move on 15:51:34 bookwar: thanks 15:51:50 #topic Jenkins plugin upgrade 15:51:58 jbair: want to comment? 15:52:03 mvadkert: the only thing we monitor is if some PR or build that has test didn't send topics within some time 15:52:36 oh hey =) 15:53:07 No comments from the emails sent to devel or ci lists yesterday, so I believe we are good to perform the upgrade tomorrow around 9AM Eastern US Time 15:53:20 #info jenkins plugin upgrade scheduled for tomorrow, small jenkins outage is expected 9AM Eastern US time 15:53:29 moving on :) 15:53:44 #topic DevConf CfP 15:53:49 who submitted talks? 15:53:58 testing farm has submitted a talk about packit integration 15:54:07 Testing Github PRs on Fedora/Centos with Packit 15:54:36 i also submitted a workshop for 2 hours on all Fedora CI topics, everyone from this group is welcome 15:54:44 fbo: i think you also submitted one? 15:55:15 deadline is today, so you have couple of hours for last minute submission :) 15:55:35 also pingou submitted the talk on fedora gating 15:55:46 so we have quite a presence there 15:56:02 5 minutes left, next topic :) 15:56:06 bookwar: yay, I guess we should sync with pingou so we can pull off a nice demo 15:56:16 #topic Annocheck as a gating test 15:56:42 there is a submisson for Fedora change to enable annobin check for all fedora packages 15:56:52 hmm, should that not be part of rpminspect? 15:56:56 dcantrell, tflink do you have any comments that? 15:57:15 annocheck is slated for rpminspect as that's functionality that rpmdiff does in the legacy environment 15:57:27 yeah, makes sense 15:57:36 to me it makes sense in the scope of rpminspect because that will allow before/after build comparison as well as tracking files moves and subpackage changes 15:57:49 it should be do-able eventually if not integrated into rpminspect but the road getting there is unclear to me at this point 15:58:05 rpminspect already has a lot of ELF checks in place (which I'm working on right now too) so annocheck extending that is a good fit 15:58:20 bookwar: yes 2 talks submitted 15:59:25 if i understood correctly, right now rpminspect doesn't cover everything what annocheck covers 15:59:47 that's correct. I haven't added the annocheck stuff to rpminspect yet 16:00:08 so we can work on extending rpminspect, but can't we run one after the other in the same pipeline already? 16:00:18 or create a duplicate pipeline with annocheck 16:00:43 just so that we are not blocked on the development of rpminspect with this feature 16:00:58 that's certainly a possibility, yes 16:01:26 I'm not sure that would line up with where we're trying to go in the long run but as a short term solution, it would work 16:01:40 dcantrell: can you share your plans regarding elf checks for rpminspect on a mailing list? 16:01:59 bookwar: ok 16:02:01 i think we can get this conversation going, while we still wait for resultsdb-updater deployment 16:02:30 adding the support to rpminspect is not a big deal, all I have to do is bump it up on the to do list in priority 16:02:37 the support for annocheck 16:02:52 dcantrell: maybe you can get the developer of annocheck to work on it 16:03:29 bookwar: I don't think that will really help because it's either I do the work or I explain how to contribute to the library and walk them through doing the same thing 16:03:49 bookwar: yeah, I don't think that resultsdb-updater is the biggest hurdle or blocking discussion 16:04:00 dcantrell: ok, up to you 16:04:17 #topic Open floor 16:04:33 we past the time, but in case anyone has anything more to talk about 16:04:40 bookwar: depending on where the conversation goes on the mailing list. some people are open to contributing to rpminspect, others don't have time. 16:05:26 we have enabled centos-stream testing in Packit 16:05:36 we test also epel-8 against centos-stream 16:06:02 mvadkert: thank you, forgot about it 16:06:09 I do not have a example around, but we will have some real use case shortly, the idea is to test rhel8 nightly in upstream 16:06:22 also we added testing centos7 16:06:27 what is quite nice, but needs more work 16:06:34 some people are building also epel7 16:06:43 and want feedback 16:06:57 #info packit runs tests on centos stream and epel now 16:07:04 also what works now is "/packit test" 16:07:07 to restart just the test jobs 16:07:11 via a comment in the PR 16:07:24 in case of infra issues and update of tests outside of the PR 16:07:27 it can be handy 16:07:42 cool 16:08:04 bookwar: any news on AWS? 16:08:27 i am checking the ci objective doc 16:08:32 and going to update it 16:08:37 no other news yet 16:09:12 ok, so let's stop here, and next time i am going to try the agenda doc, for a more organized meeting :) 16:09:23 please add your items 16:09:29 #endmeeting