15:00:03 #startmeeting Bodhi stakeholders (2017-04-25) 15:00:04 Meeting started Tue Apr 25 15:00:03 2017 UTC. The chair is bowlofeggs. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:00:04 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 15:00:04 The meeting name has been set to 'bodhi_stakeholders_(2017-04-25)' 15:00:05 #meetingname bodhi_stakeholders 15:00:05 The meeting name has been set to 'bodhi_stakeholders' 15:00:06 #topic salutations 15:00:08 #chair acarter bowlofeggs dgilmore masta mboddu nirik pbrobinson puiterwijk trishnag 15:00:08 Current chairs: acarter bowlofeggs dgilmore masta mboddu nirik pbrobinson puiterwijk trishnag 15:00:27 .helo puiterwijk 15:00:42 * nirik is sort of here. 15:00:56 * sochotni waves 15:02:17 .hello dustymabe 15:02:18 dustymabe: dustymabe 'Dusty Mabe' 15:02:54 ahoy! 15:04:40 #topic announcements and information 15:04:41 #info A Bodhi 2.6.0 beta is deployed to production: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/ 15:04:43 #info Release notes available at https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/docs/release_notes.html 15:04:44 #info There are some severe problems with this release, and a 2.6.1 is planned: https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/milestone/5 15:06:13 bowlofeggs: problems are not related to the module changes I am guessing based on the issues in the milestone? 15:06:39 sochotni: not directly, though the changes that likely broke it were done to ease development of modules 15:07:00 #topic multi-type support in Bodhi 15:07:01 #info There is a milestone tracking adding multi-type support to Bodhi: https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/milestone/4 15:07:30 jcline and i have been working on bodhi's database models to make them more flexible to support more types than just RPMs 15:07:57 we believe we have finished reworking the models that need to be reworked, and i have begun creating new module models for packages and builds 15:08:15 that work would be getting done today were it not for the production issues, but it should get finished soon 15:08:33 once we have that done, we should be able to get started on altering the API to support multiple types 15:08:45 all that to say, i think we're fairly on track for fedora 27 15:09:00 any questions or comments about multi-type support? 15:09:03 \o/ 15:09:21 while we are on this topic - in support of this bodhi feature I have a RFC in koji-devel around content generator support in module build service 15:09:48 for some reason it's not in the archives though 15:10:13 I am not sure if it actually got there to be honest 15:11:31 cool 15:11:44 ok, we can move on to issue prioritization 15:11:54 #topic Looking forward 15:11:56 #info Bodhi's high priority issue list https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3A%22High+priority%22 15:11:57 #info High priority means it's important, but not a show stopper 15:11:59 Any filed issues that aren't on these lists that should be? 15:12:21 * dustymabe looks 15:12:29 the issues we learned abotu today are all critical priority, so aren't on that list but are "higher than high" ☺ 15:12:40 which one is the one kushal is working on? 15:13:10 #1182? 15:13:20 bowlofeggs: yesterdays is not on high prio, but critical 15:13:29 Ah, that's what you said. Sorry 15:14:20 dustymabe: yeah we should probably alter and assign https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/issues/1182 15:16:02 any other issues to discuss, or are their fairly triaged? 15:16:07 *they 15:19:20 Nothing from me :) 15:19:49 bowlofeggs: I am thinking of the needed pungi changes atm... 15:20:09 cool. 15:20:13 though they are more of a pungi RFE, I still wonder 15:20:26 yeah those would be good to discuss with lsedlar 15:20:28 we can talk about that separately 15:20:47 i don't have any other planned topics for today, so we can move to open floor 15:20:55 #topic Open floor 15:21:21 bowlofeggs: are the problems with bodhi 2.6.0 going to effect yesterday's or today's mash? 15:22:10 mboddu: there are definitely problems in the mash, but i don' tknow what they are due to a weird error handling issue 15:22:18 mboddu: so it's hard to say how severe they are 15:22:31 something is defintiely not right though 15:23:11 i've inserted a logging statement to learn more but we have to restart fedmsg-hub for that to be picked up. puiterwijk has also changed how fedmsg is initialized (which actually could have been the very issue i'm trying to catch witht he log) 15:23:22 so the current run is expected to emit the same error messages 15:23:33 after that we want to restart fedmsg-hub to pick up the chnages 15:23:41 and then we want to run a short mash (like 1 package, or maybe f26) 15:23:49 to see if it works or not 15:23:54 bowlofeggs: well, thats scary :) 15:23:58 or to see if we can get that logging statement 15:24:20 bowlofeggs: not knowing what got effected 15:24:24 yeah 15:24:40 i'm going to add this log statement upstream too, so it'll stick around for any future problems 15:24:49 we have a try/except that is eating the error message 15:25:24 Okay, thats all I got, we can try something today evening if the mash is completed by EOD today 15:25:27 Well, as said, given the timing of the error, I'm reasonably sure what code it is. But I'm just 99% sure, and for the last % I'd like the logs :) 15:26:23 ☺ 15:26:32 and the logs will be good to have in the future anyway 15:26:52 anything else for open floor, or shall we call this a short and sweet meeting? 15:26:53 Absolutely 15:28:07 ok i will call this EOM, thanks everyone! 15:28:13 #endmeeting