16:00:09 #startmeeting fpc 16:00:09 Meeting started Thu May 11 16:00:09 2017 UTC. The chair is geppetto. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:00:09 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 16:00:09 The meeting name has been set to 'fpc' 16:00:09 #meetingname fpc 16:00:09 The meeting name has been set to 'fpc' 16:00:09 #topic Roll Call 16:00:15 * limburgher here 16:00:16 Hi 16:00:19 #chair limburgher 16:00:19 Current chairs: geppetto limburgher 16:00:23 hello 16:00:34 #chair orionp 16:00:34 Current chairs: geppetto limburgher orionp 16:03:13 Hey. 16:03:20 Hi again :-) 16:03:34 #chair tibbs 16:03:34 Current chairs: geppetto limburgher orionp tibbs 16:03:38 #chair mbooth 16:03:38 Current chairs: geppetto limburgher mbooth orionp tibbs 16:03:57 Hey, that's makes 5 :) 16:04:06 give it another couple of minutes and then we can start. 16:04:15 Only have a single ticket atm. and I don't think it'll take long 16:06:18 #topic Schedule 16:06:21 https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/W7KCY7FUUTKIHAAUGDMEYCIMIOOEFSDB/ 16:06:32 #topic #684 Fix bootstrap guidelines 16:06:37 .fpc 684 16:06:40 geppetto: Issue #684: Fix bootstrap guidelines - packaging-committee - Pagure - https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/684 16:09:29 I am here, also ;) 16:10:01 #chair racor 16:10:01 Current chairs: geppetto limburgher mbooth orionp racor tibbs 16:10:17 So I think the idea here was that we assumed people wouldn't need to bootstrap that often 16:10:51 It's a case of us touching something and now other people want changes there as well. 16:10:59 So we recommended people turn it off after they've bootstrapped 16:11:23 Yeh, that too, but that's what happens when you shine a light into the darkness ;) 16:12:25 my general sense was that since the build system (koji) didn't support a bootstrap flag, that the only real useful thing was setting bootstrap to 1 or 0 16:12:50 * geppetto nods 16:13:36 and that we always wanted it defined in case someone used %bootstrap without the ? 16:13:44 Can anyone think of a reason not to change this? 16:14:56 not really, it only affects personal builds at the moment so it would be good to get it "right" 16:16:22 * geppetto nods … ok, I'm +1 then. 16:17:51 Seems ok, +1 16:18:01 To make this change? https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=User:Vondruch/Bootsrap_guidelines&diff=492334&oldid=492333 16:18:05 Sure, +1 16:18:18 mbooth: yeh 16:21:30 tibbs: racor orionp: Want to vote? 16:21:52 Alternate version, fwiw - %global bootstrap %{?_with_bootstrap:1}%{!?_with_bootstrap:0} it always defines bootstrap 16:22:08 Sorry, super busy today. 16:22:22 orionp: I am fine with it if you prefer that 16:22:39 also, should this go into rpm-redhat-config or similar? 16:23:07 I would certainly be happy to do that if it works. But I haven't tested it or anything. 16:23:09 Probably fine to be per. package given how little use it has 16:23:31 But I'm fine with it being global … as long as we don't break anything 16:23:50 actually, I am using %bcond_with|without for this 16:23:55 what's the diff between _with_blah and with_blah ? 16:25:04 cf. the comments around %bcond in /usr/lib/rpm/macros 16:28:07 IIRC, _with_foo is the content of command line argument passed to rpmbuild --with foo , while with_foo is a %global 16:30:03 * geppetto has no idea 16:30:23 I usually just paste something into my specfiles until it works :) … 16:30:42 racor: Do you want/have a different line? 16:30:47 geppetto: Packaging by brute force? :-) 16:31:13 mbooth: Stackoverflow platinum tier 16:31:39 geppetto: Not necessarily. To me, all appears to be a bit "weird" 16:31:55 IMO bcond stuff would be easier (talking as a packager) 16:32:27 Does someone want to change the draft/diff so we can vote on a bcond version? 16:32:59 all I am doing is to add a "%bcond_with" rsp. "%bcond_without" and edit it to the opposite after bootstrapping 16:33:00 racor: that's a common thing people say about rpm :-o 16:33:25 * geppetto nods 16:34:15 later in the spec, I usually use %{with ...} or %{defined ..,} 16:36:28 I'm fine with the proposed version. 16:37:16 Ok, that's +4 … anyone else want to vote the simple change in, or propose something else? 16:37:44 Sorry, I keep getting called away. 16:38:09 geppetto: I feel we are about to reinvent the wheel. 16:38:10 I'm +1 to the proposal. 16:38:44 racor: It's more like grinding a corner off our old wheel 16:38:49 I mean, I was +1 to the the change which we're now revising, so I don't know how much to trust myself. 16:39:20 But if people are super confused because we defined the setting backwards, then I guess we screwed up. 16:39:40 * geppetto nods 16:39:52 We are at +5 now … you want to vote for the record racor ? 16:39:55 geppetto: Na. though we are removing one corner, we are adding a new one. 16:40:21 Now that there are +5, I vote -1 16:40:37 If the people using the wheel are happier, I guess that's good enough 16:40:39 ok 16:40:48 #action Fix bootstrap guidelines (+1:5, 0:0, -1:1) 16:41:17 racor: Did you want to propose to change it to something else next meeting? 16:41:57 Have time to write a new draft change etc. 16:42:05 geppetto: I don't know, if it's worth the fuzz 16:42:06 I can leave the ticket open then 16:42:12 Fair enough 16:42:18 #topic Open Floor 16:42:22 I'm certainly happy waiting if there's another proposal to consider. 16:42:41 Did anyone have anything else to talk about? 16:43:02 Not me; I was hoping for a short meeting. 16:43:04 Not I, said the duck. Busy duck today. 16:44:48 Ok, cool. I'll let you all get back to lunch or work :) 16:45:03 #endmeeting