16:00:03 <geppetto> #startmeeting fpc
16:00:03 <zodbot> Meeting started Thu Jun 14 16:00:03 2018 UTC.
16:00:03 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
16:00:03 <zodbot> The chair is geppetto. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:00:03 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
16:00:03 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fpc'
16:00:04 <geppetto> #meetingname fpc
16:00:04 <geppetto> #topic Roll Call
16:00:04 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fpc'
16:00:09 <tibbs> Howdy.
16:00:12 <decathorpe> ahoy
16:00:13 <mbooth> Hi
16:00:19 <redi> hi
16:00:21 <limburgher> yo
16:00:23 <mhroncok> hi
16:00:40 <ignatenkobrain> .hello2
16:00:43 <zodbot> ignatenkobrain: ignatenkobrain 'Igor Gnatenko' <ignatenko@redhat.com>
16:00:50 <geppetto> #chair tibbs
16:00:50 <zodbot> Current chairs: geppetto tibbs
16:00:53 <geppetto> #chair decathorpe
16:00:53 <zodbot> Current chairs: decathorpe geppetto tibbs
16:00:56 <geppetto> #chair mbooth
16:00:56 <zodbot> Current chairs: decathorpe geppetto mbooth tibbs
16:00:58 <geppetto> #chair redi
16:00:58 <zodbot> Current chairs: decathorpe geppetto mbooth redi tibbs
16:01:01 <geppetto> #chair mhroncok
16:01:01 <zodbot> Current chairs: decathorpe geppetto mbooth mhroncok redi tibbs
16:01:03 <geppetto> #chair ignatenkobrain
16:01:03 <zodbot> Current chairs: decathorpe geppetto ignatenkobrain mbooth mhroncok redi tibbs
16:01:16 <geppetto> woo … almost everyone here :)
16:01:28 <decathorpe> now only if there was something to discuss ;)
16:01:36 <geppetto> indeed
16:01:45 <limburgher> geppetto, :)
16:01:52 <geppetto> #chair limburgher
16:01:52 <zodbot> Current chairs: decathorpe geppetto ignatenkobrain limburgher mbooth mhroncok redi tibbs
16:02:33 <tibbs> Yeah, I just have a couple of writeups.  We have removed the meeting tags from a number of tickets.  I suggest we remove the rest after this and only readd them if there's something to talk about.
16:02:59 <limburgher> I'm ok with a short meeting, I'm meeting an old friend for lunch.
16:03:05 <tibbs> All it really takes is four or five actually productive meetings and then we can start skipping meetings.
16:03:24 <decathorpe> sounds good
16:03:31 <limburgher> #peakfpc
16:03:39 <geppetto> #topic Schedule
16:03:43 <geppetto> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/4PAJT5NW7SNYAJ7PIKGEBFJ72RGK5ONW/
16:04:05 <tibbs> Still, 31 tickets that still need someone to go over and either close or... I don't know what to do with some of them.
16:04:09 <geppetto> tibbs: yeh, even though we have a schedule … I'm not sure we have anything to talk about on them
16:04:45 * limburgher recalls the old saw about horses and FPC tickets
16:05:25 <mhroncok> I saw some message on a ML (don't remember which one) about go guidelines
16:05:35 <mhroncok> I see there is a n open ticket but I don't know what's there to do
16:05:46 <tibbs> Yeah, go guidelines get two tickets.
16:05:55 <mhroncok> https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/734
16:05:58 <tibbs> But... where's the actual draft?
16:06:11 <mhroncok> https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/382
16:06:11 <decathorpe> I asked for an up-to-date draft on the forge stuff (which is the prerequisite for go stuff), but have got no answer
16:06:39 <tibbs> I guess "more go packaging" is a real draft.
16:07:12 <tibbs> But it's confusing because it says it's just an enhancement proposal for an existing draft that the go people abandoned a long time ago.
16:07:43 <decathorpe> and it depends on the new forge-hosted project guidelines
16:07:43 <limburgher> It's like we have a layer of meta-guidelines that exist only in the ticketsphere.
16:08:14 <mhroncok> exactly
16:08:27 <tibbs> Honestly I'm not going to be able to say that I know jack about Go.  I just know it was so important that we get docker or whatever it was into the distro that at the time that people just ignored good packaging in the name of expediency.
16:08:48 <redi> that seems to be how everything works in the Go-verse
16:08:57 <decathorpe> it's horrible :D
16:09:01 <limburgher> redi: I tried so hard NOT to type that.
16:09:06 <mhroncok> :D
16:09:09 <redi> I say these things so you don't have to ;)
16:09:14 <limburgher> redi++
16:09:16 <zodbot> limburgher: Karma for jwakely changed to 1 (for the f28 release cycle):  https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any
16:09:50 <limburgher> I was looking to see if we had influxdb in Fedora, and I looked into what a source compile would entail and I made martinis.
16:09:52 <tibbs> But nim has done hard work here, and I'm happy to perhaps push forward in the hopes of getting something reasonable approved now and then perhaps fixed if needed.
16:10:02 <limburgher> tibbs: Very much yes.
16:10:14 <geppetto> I'm mostly happy to approach whatever decathorpe likes :)
16:10:20 <geppetto> *approve
16:10:35 <tibbs> But it's true that it would be good to finish the forge stuff first.
16:10:43 <geppetto> But not having a draft is kind of a sticking point.
16:10:52 <decathorpe> well, I'm maintaining 44 go packages myself, so I'm directly affected by this
16:10:55 <limburgher> Prefereably before major forges change their formatting. Again.
16:11:27 <redi> I still haven't tested the forge-hosted stuff. I keep thinking I'll get a chance to "this week", every week. I have a couple of things I want to package in COPR from git forges.
16:12:00 <decathorpe> I've used it, and it seems to work (with the exception of the awful usage of tarball mtime)
16:12:32 <tibbs> Well, then there's a decision tree thing we get to go through:
16:13:27 <tibbs> We decide if we care enough about the tarball mtime thing to either request that it be changed, or change what we require (to, say, not require the date in the versioning information for snapshots).
16:13:42 <tibbs> Then we can decide whether we like the forge guidelines and get them approved.
16:13:46 <tibbs> Then we work on the go guidelines.
16:13:53 <decathorpe> exactly
16:13:54 <mhroncok> I think we should not block this on the mtime thing
16:14:00 <mhroncok> let's get it as is
16:14:04 <tibbs> Seems like a lot of things are waiting around for the one thing.
16:14:08 <mhroncok> and then reconsider the date requirement
16:14:20 <mhroncok> and if removed, we can change this
16:14:22 <decathorpe> well, and there's no up-to-date draft
16:14:30 <mhroncok> it's not like we approve it and it stays like that for ever
16:14:40 <tibbs> decathorpe: Which draft is not up to date?
16:15:02 <tibbs> I think at this point it's going to fall to us to update any draft to be how we want it.
16:15:17 <decathorpe> Simplify packaging of forge-hosted projects
16:15:58 <tibbs> I haven't seen any recent changes to the forge macros merged, and there are no relevant PRs against them.
16:16:11 <geppetto> #topic #719 Simplify packaging of forge-hosted projects
16:16:26 <tibbs> Oh, wait, except for the one you submitted.
16:16:31 <geppetto> tibbs: there's: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/redhat-rpm-config/pull-request/24
16:16:44 <tibbs> Which is waiting on any comment at all from nim.
16:17:08 <decathorpe> (who has been quiet for a month)
16:17:17 <geppetto> Are we sure he knows about it?
16:17:20 <tibbs> I will say that I am rather concerned that these are presented to us as "done" and that any changes we want will just be met with silence.
16:17:27 <ignatenkobrain> should we ping him?
16:17:28 <ignatenkobrain> once more
16:17:47 <geppetto> It can't hurt
16:18:13 <tibbs> decathorpe: Interestingly, I don't reaally agree with you about the dot you inserted.
16:18:53 <decathorpe> I only did that to increase readability for humans. but I can update my PR to get rid of it again
16:18:57 <tibbs> My preference would be to have the dot and not have the "git", but that's not what nim chose originally.
16:19:20 <tibbs> The "git" itself confers no real useful information to humans.
16:19:43 <decathorpe> I think the identifier is mandated by the versioning guidelines
16:19:48 <mhroncok> well it makes it clear form first sight that it's a git hash and not some random number/letters
16:19:54 <tibbs> So <date>.<hash> is by far the most readable.
16:20:22 <tibbs> But the current guidelines don't even allow the use of the dot where you've inserted it.
16:20:33 <tibbs> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Versioning#Snapshots lists the two permitted formats.
16:20:48 <decathorpe> ah, you're right.
16:20:52 <tibbs> Of course, we could change that.
16:21:14 <tibbs> Though to be fair, we only require that the date be there.  Everything else is merely "suggested".
16:21:31 * decathorpe shrugs
16:21:43 <geppetto> Yeh, I'd much rather have a single format that everyone used … but eh.
16:21:55 <decathorpe> I don't care enough about this anymore to block the whole thing
16:22:16 <geppetto> the second form of YYYYMMDDgit<hash> seems readable to me, and small
16:22:45 <tibbs> Of course I still have to decide on your PR.  I don't think any of the other redhat-rpm-config maintainers is going to care about it at all.
16:23:04 <decathorpe> ok, I'll drop the dot and update the PR
16:23:18 <geppetto> but I'm fine with what decathorpe proposed
16:23:30 <geppetto> seems silly to care much about an extra .
16:23:34 <geppetto> jinks ;)
16:24:13 <tibbs> geppetto: well, sure, but it would seem odd to have nice and explicit guidelines for that and then a major system doing something else.
16:24:41 <tibbs> Especially when we're essentially in control of both ends of things.
16:24:47 <mhroncok> right
16:25:03 <tibbs> Not a big deal, but you just know someone would bring it up at some point.
16:25:09 * geppetto nods
16:25:32 <tibbs> But really, I can't imagine nim objecting to a change merely allowing someone to specify the snapshot date if they want.
16:27:05 * decathorpe updated PR and description to drop the additional dot
16:29:03 <geppetto> fair enough
16:29:33 <geppetto> #topic Open Floor
16:29:54 <mhroncok> I think we open floored enough already :D
16:29:54 <geppetto> mbooth: I assume 743 doesn't have a new draft yet?
16:29:58 <geppetto> ha
16:30:14 <geppetto> most of it was talking about 719 … but yeh
16:30:23 <mbooth> geppetto: Working on it, will be ready next probably
16:30:35 <geppetto> Can probably close the meeting in a few minutes
16:30:38 <mhroncok> tibbs: 723
16:30:41 <mhroncok> https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/723
16:30:45 <limburgher> Yeah, I have nothing.
16:30:51 <mhroncok> can I go and put it there or would you like to adjust it somehow?
16:31:12 <tibbs> mhroncok: I'm actually doing some writeup stuff now so it will be done soon.
16:31:32 <mhroncok> tibbs: I don't want you to do all the things, if I can help
16:31:43 <mhroncok> I'm just not sure what's the workflow here
16:31:44 <tibbs> decathorpe: I'll give nim a bit more time to respond but otherwise I'm inclined to just merge that PR.
16:32:14 <tibbs> mhroncok: Normally, yeah, I'd say "please do it" but I have the page open in an editor now so there's not much point.
16:32:24 <decathorpe> yep, I don't think there's anything objectionable left
16:32:29 <mhroncok> ok
16:32:37 <mhroncok> I don't have anything else then
16:32:52 <tibbs> Workflow really is just write up approved drafts into the wiki, add some announcement text to the wiki, change status to announce.
16:33:06 <tibbs> Then once a week or so, gather all of the announcement texts and mail out an announcement.
16:33:20 <tibbs> Sorry, "add some announcement text to the _ticket_".
16:34:57 <geppetto> Ok, I think we are done?
16:35:06 <mhroncok> see you next week
16:35:11 <tibbs> Yeah, nothing else from me.
16:35:12 <limburgher> Thanks all!
16:35:13 <geppetto> Going to close the meeting and give everyone 25 minutes back :)
16:35:25 <mhroncok> \o/
16:35:26 <geppetto> limburgher: enjoy the big blue room :)
16:35:38 <limburgher> geppetto: The yellow light is on.
16:35:39 <geppetto> #endmeeting