16:01:40 #startmeeting Fedora Packaging Committee 16:01:40 Meeting started Thu May 30 16:01:40 2013 UTC. The chair is spot. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:01:40 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 16:01:43 #meetingname fpc 16:01:43 The meeting name has been set to 'fpc' 16:01:48 #topic Roll Call 16:02:14 * RemiFedora is here 16:02:34 * geppetto is here 16:03:05 * SmootherFrOgZ here 16:03:53 * abadger1999 here. 16:04:24 * SmootherFrOgZ loves that fedmsg-notify for meeting 16:04:26 meeting with someone in another channel as well so I'm only half here. 16:04:55 so we're missing racor, limburgher, Rathann, tibbs 16:05:31 * limburgher is here, apparently. 16:05:47 Didn't know that. 16:05:59 I'm around. 16:06:54 okay, thats well over quorum 16:06:54 #topic Bundling libxdiff in libgit2 - https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/276 16:06:54 I have the code 99% done, but then I got busy with other stuff. 16:07:03 * spot will try to get this done asap. 16:07:11 #action spot needs more clones. 16:07:39 kalev: feel free to keep prodding me to get that done and packaged. 16:08:12 #topic Add note about network access to guidelines - https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/295 16:08:40 Not sure where to put that but I'm +1 to it. 16:08:44 I think this is a pretty good idea. 16:08:51 +1 16:08:56 +1 16:09:06 +1 also. Thought this was in there, and not just good practice. 16:09:09 Yeh, seems kind of obvious … but +1 16:09:24 obvious rule 16:09:31 Probably just needs a simple section somewhere in the first quarter of the main guidelines page. 16:09:36 +1 16:09:39 +1 16:09:40 * spot idly wonders when people will ask for the guidelines to say "packages must be in rpm format" ... 16:09:51 geppetto: You'd be amazed the people that come to me at $DAYJOB and are like, "well we don't do tarballs, so start the build with git clone. . ." 16:10:46 spot: I wouldn't be shocked if someone tries to get a klick build in this year. 16:10:46 #action approved (+1:7, 0:0, -1:0) 16:11:08 spot: it'll be the opposite -- we'll get people trying to submit packages in other formats and we'll havee to step in to tell them "No!" 16:11:08 github disease .... no more release 16:11:27 RemiFedora: 16:11:30 okay, lets get to the fun one. 16:11:43 #topic Simplifying Ruby Guidelines - https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/296 16:12:26 summarized: they want to unpack tests in %check and not in %prep. 16:12:31 Not a fan of this, and really not a fan of the attitude in the last comment there. 16:12:47 yeh … no 16:12:50 I disagree with that last comment as well. 16:12:52 "Doesn't break anything for me; anything I don't use is not useful." 16:13:15 Am I misreading this, or wouldn't this mean that the %check section could potentially test something other than the actual build? 16:13:24 since i cannot count how many test suites i've had to patch in Fedora... 16:13:31 But the "you can't patch a test" argument would seem to override all of the other considerations anyway. 16:13:32 spot, tibbs|w: Nod. 16:13:33 yeah, the original submitter probably just doesn't know the reason that we don't do things like that... vondruch has been told multiple times and still doesn't get it... 16:13:51 limburgher: eh, unlikely. I think its more that they don't want to have to keep the test files from ending up in the gem 16:14:08 spot: OIC. Still not a fan. 16:14:31 source tree (including tests) should be unpacked in prep. -1 from me. 16:14:40 -1 16:14:43 -1 here as well. 16:14:56 -1 as well 16:14:57 -1 16:15:01 agree, must be done in %prep 16:15:12 -1 16:15:18 yeh, -1 … I'd also like it if we had a way to make people choose better ticket names than a generic "simplify XYZ guidlines" N times. 16:16:05 * spot counts -7. 16:16:32 #action draft rejected, tests must be unpacked in %prep to allow for patching. (+1:0, 0:0, -1:7) 16:16:39 #topic Open Floor 16:17:53 * SmootherFrOgZ has nothing to add/talk about more 16:17:53 at least I think packager should request upstream to "please include unit test in official tarball" (which I have done so many time) 16:19:13 I think we have nothing yet in Guidelines about the use of /etc/systemd/system/foo.service.d ? 16:19:45 RemiFedora: i think you are correct. would you like to draft something? :D 16:20:07 probably the systemd guys could submit something to us 16:20:23 but I will have a look (at least I will ask for their comment) 16:20:46 I'm not even sure what that does. 16:21:03 we have some package which start using it (or giving ref to this folder) => httpd, php-fpm 16:21:44 tibbs|w: instead of copying the /lib/systemd/system/foo.service to /etc/ and using or using an include 16:22:23 systemd merge the /lib/systemd/system/foo.service + /etc/systemd/system/foo.service.d/*.conf 16:22:29 Ah, that. 16:22:33 * spot tries not to get too excited about more systemd drafts. 16:22:37 (very usefull for Env) 16:22:52 But I'm not sure why it needs a guideline; that's something that the end user/administrator can create. 16:24:20 tibbs|w: I think the guildelines could usefulll only if we plan to encourage the use of this solution, and thus discourage the use of /etc/sysconfig 16:24:41 I'm not entirely sure that's our business. 16:25:29 If FESCo sets the distro in that direction, we would draft the guidelines to implement it. 16:26:11 ok, so it's probably to systemd guys to propose something 16:29:15 okay... i'm not hearing anything else, so lets close out early and i'll go work on libxdiff. :) 16:29:24 thanks everyone. 16:29:24 #endmeeting