16:32:02 #startmeeting fedora_coreos_meeting 16:32:02 Meeting started Wed Jan 2 16:32:02 2019 UTC. 16:32:02 This meeting is logged and archived in a public location. 16:32:02 The chair is dustymabe. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:32:02 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 16:32:02 The meeting name has been set to 'fedora_coreos_meeting' 16:32:10 .hello bgilbert 16:32:11 bgilbert[1]: bgilbert 'Benjamin Gilbert' 16:32:11 #topic roll call 16:32:15 .hello2 16:32:16 dustymabe: dustymabe 'Dusty Mabe' 16:32:23 .hello sinnykumari 16:32:24 ksinny: sinnykumari 'Sinny Kumari' 16:32:34 .hello lucab 16:32:35 kaeso: lucab 'Luca Bruno' 16:32:46 .hello2 16:32:47 miabbott: miabbott 'Micah Abbott' 16:33:36 .hello2 16:33:37 slowrie: slowrie 'Stephen Lowrie' 16:33:44 #chair bgilbert[1] ksinny kaeso miabbott slowrie 16:33:44 Current chairs: bgilbert[1] dustymabe kaeso ksinny miabbott slowrie 16:35:09 * dustymabe waves at jligon 16:35:22 .hello2 16:35:23 jligon: jligon 'Jeff Ligon' 16:35:27 #chair jligon 16:35:27 Current chairs: bgilbert[1] dustymabe jligon kaeso ksinny miabbott slowrie 16:35:30 * jligon waves back 16:35:49 .hello sayanchowdhury 16:35:49 #topic Action items from last meeting 16:35:49 sayan: sayanchowdhury 'Sayan Chowdhury' 16:35:54 #chair sayan 16:35:54 Current chairs: bgilbert[1] dustymabe jligon kaeso ksinny miabbott sayan slowrie 16:36:07 here are the action items from last meeting 16:36:12 #link https://meetbot-raw.fedoraproject.org/teams/fedora_coreos_meeting/fedora_coreos_meeting.2018-12-19-16.30.txt 16:36:21 * jlebon to ask rpm-software-management org on github about name move of 16:36:22 rpm-ostree repo 16:36:24 * dustymabe to summarize GC discussion here today in #99 16:36:26 * lucab to check/document why CL images are garbage-collected on gcloud 16:36:45 #info dustymabe summarized GC discussion in #99 16:36:53 ah, I did not 16:36:56 #link https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/99#issuecomment-448717198 16:37:06 kaeso: re-action ? 16:37:10 bgilbert[1]: did you maybe ask crawford about that? 16:37:57 dustymabe: unless Benjamin did that already, yes 16:38:12 +1 16:38:19 #action kaeso to check/document why CL images are garbage-collected on gcloud 16:38:32 i'll re-action for jlebon too since he seems to be AFK 16:38:41 #action jlebon to ask rpm-software-management org on github about name move of rpm-ostree repo 16:38:46 .hello mnguyen 16:38:47 mnguyen_: mnguyen 'Michael Nguyen' 16:38:51 kaeso: I didn't 16:38:52 #chair mnguyen_ 16:38:52 Current chairs: bgilbert[1] dustymabe jligon kaeso ksinny miabbott mnguyen_ sayan slowrie 16:39:49 ok there aren't any tickets with meeting labels today (just coming back from break) but there are a few things I'd like to run through 16:39:56 #topic Garbage collection policy for OS releases 16:40:00 #link https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/99 16:40:13 so we summarized the discussion from last time and requested releng review 16:40:30 I didn't think we'd get anything back since mohan was already out but it looks like he came up with a brief response 16:40:40 anything more we'd like to reply to him with for now? 16:41:40 I'm not clear on whether that comment entirely answered my questions 16:42:09 bgilbert[1]: maybe you and I can follow up in ticket? 16:42:23 in particular, for the non-"devel" artifacts: are old update packages not pruned? 16:42:28 i think in general it looks like fedora's current policy doesn't differ too much from what we want to do, right 16:42:32 can do, unless someone knows off the top of their head 16:42:39 pruned earlier, I mean 16:42:49 dustymabe: yeah 16:43:33 bgilbert[1]: one thing that might be confusing is the use of the word 'artifact' 16:43:57 so when fedora cuts a release it includes all rpms and media that were created 16:44:16 but then updates happen and new rpms are put in the repos 16:44:47 so you have the release day artifacts (including media + rpms) and updates yum repos (rpms) 16:45:02 i think mohan is mostly referring to the policy for 'release day artifacts' 16:45:20 i'm not sure what the policy is for update artifacts 16:45:38 but in general I think we can work together to make sure our needs are satisfied 16:45:58 #action bgilbert[1] dustymabe to follow up with releng on GC policy in #99 16:46:08 hmm. so for us there are _only_ "release day" RPMs, it's just that we'll do a lot of releases :-) 16:46:12 dustymabe: +1 16:46:50 bgilbert[1]: right, but our primary artifactt is actually not an rpm, it's an ostree. so as long as we keep the ostree + golden images then I don't think we need the rpms 16:47:06 but we can discuss :) 16:47:07 .hello2 16:47:08 walters: walters 'Colin Walters' 16:47:13 welcome walters 16:47:16 #chair walters 16:47:16 Current chairs: bgilbert[1] dustymabe jligon kaeso ksinny miabbott mnguyen_ sayan slowrie walters 16:47:49 +1 to moving on 16:48:01 #topic roadmap for FCOS 16:48:10 * dustymabe hopes this link works 16:48:16 https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/pull/96/files?short_path=38574c0#diff-38574c080d4e2eb38c49b86e6588ad98 16:48:36 ^^ this is the current PR with the roadmap for Fedora CoreOS 16:48:50 maybe I should call it a timeline and not a roadmap, but you get the idea 16:49:08 this will be a WIP and will get changed often 16:49:25 the important thing is that there are no "must have" items for FCOS that are not on that list 16:49:47 so if there are any missing please let's get them added 16:50:12 the schedule is currently front heavy, because a lot of this will 16:50:17 "discover" new work 16:50:46 one thing jumps out atm: live PXE 16:50:51 for which we do not have a ticket 16:50:59 +1 16:51:01 #action bgilbert[1] to file a ticket for live PXE support 16:51:12 <3 16:51:38 we're going to find gaps, as bgilbert[1] just did 16:51:52 the important part is that we consistently churn through the items we do have on our plate 16:52:10 +1 16:52:16 if there are things that aren't must haves for final release, let's make sure we identify them as things we can do after release and be OK 16:52:59 we have lofty goals right now, some things will most likely drop off the plate. Let's make sure those are ones we can live without :) 16:53:20 live without *temporarily* 16:53:37 any comments before moving to next topic? 16:54:05 actually - one thing to mention 16:54:24 this timeline will probably start to dominate our meeting schedule a bit (i.e. checking in on progress and such of planned items) 16:54:35 so we may have a mix of "meeting" 16:54:46 label topics, + timeline related discussion 16:55:49 and that's all I had for large level topics 16:56:03 #topic open floor 16:56:42 anyone with items for open floor - we'll go into each discussion as a separate topic to keep focus 16:58:07 ok I'll bring a few up then 16:58:17 minitopic: ostree mirroring 16:58:33 we've had some discussion in various tickets on this topic before the break 16:58:56 it seems like we're oscillating a bit between double down on CDN or attempt mirroring static delta repos 16:59:15 ksinny was going to do some investigation over the past two weeks 17:00:21 if we want to tweak and experiement with CDN we'll need to wait til some of fedora infra is back from holiday which should be in a few weeks 17:00:23 yes, CDN path is already in use fr Atomic Host hence easier but we are looking into mirrormanager which requires investigation around static delta only repos 17:00:55 #info ostree mirroring support in mirrormanager is being discussed in https://github.com/fedora-infra/mirrormanager2/issues/258 17:01:28 cool 17:01:37 we don't technically need to wait, can use our own creds to set up testing stuff right? 17:02:19 walters: yeah - that is true. we can set up a separate CDN in cloudfront and test a different configuration 17:02:36 I've done it before. It's not hard to do 17:02:57 ksinny: if you want to try I can help you set this up and make sure your account has the right permissions 17:03:12 dustymabe: yes, I was about to say same :) 17:03:59 +1 17:04:00 thanks ksinny 17:04:20 thanks dustymabe! 17:04:21 i'll just keep running through small topics unless someone stops me or has another topic 17:04:33 minitopic: coreos-metadata as an rpm 17:04:46 #link https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/4 17:04:55 o/ 17:05:02 jlebon pointed out to me in the roadmap PR that I should add this to the roadmap 17:05:30 so I added it, just wondering where we stand on it and who can help 17:06:06 the RPM I did is for RHCOS, as the Fedora policy for Rust packages is quite different 17:06:30 I finished updating all the ancient dependencies 17:06:48 so it should be a bit easier to package them in Fedora 17:06:59 nice! 17:07:00 (I didn't check which one are still missing though) 17:07:10 *ones 17:07:16 kaeso: actually I found some notes I wrote before the break 17:07:38 you're going with the packaged crates? 17:08:33 kaeso: just commented in the public issue with those notes: https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/4#issuecomment-450922699 17:08:36 walters: from what I've read, that's the current Fedora policy 17:09:26 it's not required no 17:10:18 walters: my knowledge comes from https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Rust#Naming 17:10:47 there's some more on this in https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Bundled_Libraries?rd=Packaging:Bundled_Libraries 17:11:07 kaeso: it says 'Rust libraries MUST be from crates.io' 17:11:18 but is coreos-metadata a "rust library" ? 17:11:21 or just a binary 17:12:45 dustymabe: I think it fits into https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Rust#Binary 17:13:57 right. so I think if nothing else is going to use this package to 'build' or by dynamically linked to then we are OK to bundle 17:14:26 because we aren't going to be a 'rust library' and we don't need to be named rust-coreoso-metadata 17:14:43 ^^ let me know if my interpretation is wrong 17:15:04 the analogy i'm drawing here is 17:15:33 docker is named docker, not golang-docker because the package is just delivering a binary 17:16:40 dustymabe: I think the guideline is speaking about source rpm name 17:17:15 ok 17:17:33 either way. I would prefer to not bundle if we could. 17:17:54 it looks like we are 3 deps away so maybe we just knock those out 17:18:56 kaeso: walters any other comments before we move on? 17:19:27 nope 17:19:46 minitopic: tracker for 'cloud'/'no cloud agents' work 17:20:06 I created a tracker for this work with a lot of little check boxes and such 17:20:10 https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/95 17:20:37 this should help us keep up with what has/hasn't been done 17:20:46 - [ ] checkboxes! 17:20:59 if you find new items related to "clouds" that needs to be done, please add it or let me know about it 17:21:26 lots of checkbox :) 17:21:33 ... s/\[ /\[x/ of course 17:21:33 bgilbert[1]: Error: Missing "]". You may want to quote your arguments with double quotes in order to prevent extra brackets from being evaluated as nested commands. 17:21:54 silly zodbot ] are for kids 17:21:55 zodbot: kay 17:22:22 ok i'll close out the meeting a bit early if no one has any other topics 17:22:23 * jbrooks just now looks at clock 17:22:29 oh hai jbrooks 17:22:31 :) 17:22:34 :) 17:22:52 jbrooks: we're in open floor 17:22:58 anything you'd like to bring up? 17:23:02 #chair jbrooks 17:23:02 Current chairs: bgilbert[1] dustymabe jbrooks jligon kaeso ksinny miabbott mnguyen_ sayan slowrie walters 17:23:27 Not really, I've still been thinking / wondering about the okd/kube stuff 17:24:03 jbrooks: https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/93 ? 17:24:07 jbrooks: yeah me as well 17:24:31 I wonder if package layering wouldn't be so bad -- there isn't an easy option for the flexibility 17:24:52 And by maintaining certain repos. we could let ppl stay on particular versions of things 17:25:11 kaeso, that's the right issue 17:25:52 Another thing, with OKD 4.0, we don't have packages for that yet, so we're still on the ansible side of things for cluster setup 17:26:55 jbrooks: yeah package layering is one of the ways we talked about allowing people to "switch versions" of kube 17:27:31 I still think it would be nice to have it be "included" in whatever artifact we deliver, though 17:27:44 That still works even if we do bake one in -- you can layer to replace 17:27:46 "included" could mean various things, from baked in to the ostree 17:28:06 jbrooks: right, you can layer to replace 17:28:19 I don't think that differs from what we have talked about in the past 17:28:30 Right 17:28:41 the one thing we have said that we want to make sure people can do is "pin" to a version of kubernetes/origin though 17:29:21 i.e. if you are on kube 1.8 and the next FCOS has 1.9 baked in and you want to stay, then there should be some way to configure that 17:29:27 That would require a layering approach, I think 17:29:53 Or, baked in, and if you want to opt out of the baked in update, you'll need to switch to layered 17:30:14 right 17:30:22 so the devil here is in the details mostly 17:30:39 Anyway, before we know it, we'll be shipping, so we need to figure this stuff out 17:31:02 but i think in general this was the strategy we were thinking of taking (with modularity allowing for users to select different streams possibly) 17:31:08 https://github.com/projectatomic/rpm-ostree/issues/1466 17:32:07 jbrooks: i agree. the sooner we figure this out the better 17:32:31 jbrooks: we could use some help in driving this conversation, thanks for your nudges in that direction so far 17:32:51 jbrooks: will you help us head up this effort? 17:33:01 jbrooks, Yes 17:33:05 heh 17:33:09 dustymabe, Yes 17:33:14 :) 17:33:31 still getting reacquainted w/ the keyboard 17:33:36 cool - feel free to add meeting labels to items and we'll discuss early/often 17:33:47 OK 17:33:58 any other topics before we close out the first meeting of 2019? 17:35:01 #endmeeting