15:01:12 <mjwolf> #startmeeting Server Working Group Weekly Meeting (2016-06-21)
15:01:12 <zodbot> Meeting started Tue Jun 21 15:01:12 2016 UTC.  The chair is mjwolf. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
15:01:12 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
15:01:12 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'server_working_group_weekly_meeting_(2016-06-21)'
15:01:27 <mjwolf> #chair danofsatx nirik stefw adamw simi mhayden jds2001 mjwolf hanthana
15:01:27 <zodbot> Current chairs: adamw danofsatx hanthana jds2001 mhayden mjwolf nirik simi stefw
15:01:34 <jds2001> .hello jstanley
15:01:36 <zodbot> jds2001: jstanley 'Jon Stanley' <jonstanley@gmail.com>
15:02:00 * nirik is here, but also not here dealing with fedora 24 release day stuff.
15:03:23 <mhayden> .hello mhayden
15:03:24 <zodbot> mhayden: mhayden 'Major Hayden' <major@mhtx.net>
15:03:40 * mhayden hears this fedora 24 stuff is good
15:04:31 * jds2001 does too
15:05:19 * mjwolf wonders if there will be a quorum today
15:06:29 <linuxmodder> .fas linuxmodder
15:06:29 <zodbot> linuxmodder: linuxmodder 'Corey W Sheldon' <sheldon.corey@openmailbox.org>
15:06:44 <linuxmodder> may be in and out  monitor seeder  for GA
15:08:20 <adamw> .hello adamwill
15:08:21 <zodbot> adamw: adamwill 'Adam Williamson' <awilliam@redhat.com>
15:09:52 <mjwolf> Not sure if 5 is enough or not
15:10:12 <mjwolf> but also I was on vacation last week and did not send out an agenda request email
15:10:12 <jds2001> 5/9 is fine i think
15:10:26 <jds2001> well 5/8, which should be an agenda item :)
15:11:34 <mjwolf> #topic   open position
15:12:41 <jds2001> so simo stepped down
15:12:51 * jds2001 thanks him for his service :)
15:13:56 <mjwolf> +1
15:14:25 <mjwolf> so the next step is for an email to go to the list asking for interested parties/candidates correct?
15:14:54 <jds2001> yeah
15:15:31 <mjwolf> I can do that if no one else wants to
15:15:57 <jds2001> sounds like a plan :)
15:16:33 <mjwolf> #action mjwolf will send out a note asking for interested people to join the working group
15:18:22 <mjwolf> what is the current status of F-24?  Did I miss the announce?
15:18:33 <jds2001> released today :)
15:18:58 <adamw> the validation tests passed
15:19:05 <mjwolf> ok that was the schedule.  I thought I normally saw emails about that.  I will keep my eyes open for that
15:19:21 <adamw> i seem to recall some mention of a possible freeipa bug, but i can't find the reference any more
15:19:45 * adamw gonna upgrade his freeipa server and see how it goes
15:20:01 <sgallagh> adamw: I think you're talking about the nss/freeipa bug that was at risk of hitting at 0day, but I think it was fixed thanks to the slip.
15:20:48 <linuxmodder> leaches  abound
15:21:00 <sgallagh> /me returns to pretending he doesn't attend this meeting anymore
15:21:01 <linuxmodder> I'm seeing action on all seeds I'm pushing atm
15:21:41 <linuxmodder> sgallagh,  you may have stepped down but  you still love us its okay
15:22:36 <adamw> sgallagh: no, that wasn't it. never mind, i'll find it if i can.
15:22:41 <sgallagh> ko
15:24:39 <mjwolf> #topic open questions
15:24:44 <jds2001> sgallagh: do you have anything for us on the openshift thingy?
15:24:56 * jds2001 saw rumblings on the cloud ML
15:25:57 <sgallagh> jds2001: Mostly that the Cloud WG is strongly looking at making a complete OpenShift solution their primary strategy, so that would lend a strong argument in favor of retooling Server Roles to be OpenShift Apps.
15:26:41 <jds2001> i guess the question is where does that leave the server WG?
15:26:49 <jds2001> making these openshift apps?
15:26:57 <jds2001> or making something else? Or both?
15:29:36 <sgallagh> That is the great existential question at the heart of Fedora Server right now, I think
15:29:48 <sgallagh> And it's pretty much the WG's job description to figure that out
15:30:29 * jds2001 is deafened by the silence.....anyone?
15:31:20 <adamw> not to sound buck-pass-y, but i'm just here for the QA
15:31:23 * jds2001 says both. We probably need to update the PRD in order to shift the direction.
15:31:29 <adamw> so i'm kinda...buck-passing
15:31:47 <jds2001> buck accepted, i guess? :D
15:32:05 <jds2001> but I think that we need a product for pets.
15:32:27 <jds2001> as much as i would like it to be the case, we can't have all cattle.
15:32:45 <jds2001> and i think we need to cater to both use-cases
15:33:15 <jds2001> thoughts?
15:33:48 <mjwolf> use cases in the sense of basic/traditional servers vs openshift apps?
15:33:57 <jds2001> yeah
15:33:58 <adamw> well, i agree, but for a lot of cattle cases, a minimal install is a perfectly fine 'pets' product
15:34:02 <adamw> er
15:34:05 <adamw> a lot of pets cases
15:35:29 <adamw> so kinda the baseline for a pets product is it's got to make life easier for *somebody* than what they can easily do themselves starting from a minimal install
15:35:33 <jds2001> yeah, who curates that?
15:35:42 <adamw> nobody!
15:36:07 <adamw> the magic just happens
15:36:42 <jds2001> am i the only one concerned by this state of affairs?
15:36:56 <mjwolf> so is the pets products something like a group install that would be done?
15:37:02 <adamw> well, i mean, it depends whether you catch me before my fourth whisky of the day
15:37:27 <jds2001> mmm, canadian whisky :D
15:37:39 <jds2001> er, i cant spell
15:38:19 <jds2001> mjwolf: we diverged the server product in f24 to have a different partitioning scheme, for example
15:38:30 <jds2001> one that makes more sense to server deployments
15:38:50 <jds2001> so it's not just a groupinstall, we can alter other things within a product to differentiate it.
15:39:31 <mjwolf> ok was just wondering if there were lots of requests for groupinstalls
15:39:58 <mjwolf> so basically would people view a groupinstall to be roughly equal to an openshift app.  I know that is a crude analogy
15:40:49 <jds2001> we'd need to put the pieces together in a cohesive manner rather than just "here's a bunch of bits! Have fun!"
15:44:33 <mjwolf> so does anyone have a sense for how people are using fedora server?  Are there some use cases we should focus on first?
15:45:48 * jds2001 was brought in to the WG for a Real World(TM) view. I'll say that most of my experience if with RHEL in a large enterprise.
15:46:03 <jds2001> and there, we view it as a construction kit.
15:46:34 <jds2001> but I'm not certain that the target audience of Server is exactly the same, in fact I know that it isn't.
15:47:01 <jds2001> so we need some user stories!
15:47:39 <jds2001> what do Real People(TM) want to do with this thing??
15:48:13 <mjwolf> yes we need that
15:48:48 <jds2001> particularly in the SMB space? Large enterprises are going to take it, deconstruct it, and do what they please because they have large engineering staffs.
15:49:36 * nirik reads back
15:53:03 <mjwolf> do a lot of users attend FLOCK? it seemed to me it was mostly developers
15:53:20 <jds2001> yeah, its a developer oriented event.
15:54:47 * jds2001 has a hard stop at noon.
15:55:13 <mjwolf> ok so lets discuss who will run the meeting next week
15:55:20 <mjwolf> #topic next weeks chair
15:55:26 <mjwolf> any takers?
15:55:32 * jds2001 will be at summit next week
15:55:56 <jds2001> perhaps we should cancel if a large amount of folks cant make it because of summit?
15:56:12 <mjwolf> ok sounds reasonable
15:56:22 <mjwolf> are there any takers then for 2 weeks from now :-)
15:56:56 <mjwolf> two weeks from now is july 5th
15:57:08 <jds2001> well, first are lots of folks going to summit?
15:57:08 <mjwolf> not sure many will attend then either
15:57:12 <jds2001> or is it just me?
15:57:56 * nirik will be here next week and the week after. can run things on the 5th I guess... although someone who hasn't had the fun yet still could. ;)
15:59:12 * jds2001 cna the week after
15:59:21 <jds2001> i.e. the 5th
16:00:00 <nirik> so how about cancel next week, meet the 5th?
16:00:36 <jds2001> sounds good
16:00:46 <mjwolf> sounds fine to me
16:01:16 <mjwolf> ok we are at the top of the hour
16:01:28 <mjwolf> anything else?  otherwise i will close out the meeting for this week
16:02:23 <mjwolf> #endmeeting