15:00:13 <zbyszek> #startmeeting FESCO (2019-10-21) 15:00:14 <zodbot> Meeting started Mon Oct 21 15:00:13 2019 UTC. 15:00:14 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location. 15:00:14 <zodbot> The chair is zbyszek. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:00:14 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 15:00:14 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fesco_(2019-10-21)' 15:00:14 <zbyszek> #meetingname fesco 15:00:14 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fesco' 15:00:14 <zbyszek> #chair nirik, ignatenkobrain, jforbes, zbyszek, bookwar, sgallagh, contyk, mhroncok, otaylor 15:00:14 <zodbot> Current chairs: bookwar contyk ignatenkobrain jforbes mhroncok nirik otaylor sgallagh zbyszek 15:00:16 <zbyszek> #topic init process 15:00:18 <zbyszek> .hello2 15:00:19 <zodbot> zbyszek: zbyszek 'Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek' <zbyszek@in.waw.pl> 15:00:23 <jforbes> .hello2 15:00:24 <sgallagh> .hello2 15:00:25 <zodbot> jforbes: jforbes 'Justin M. Forbes' <jforbes@redhat.com> 15:00:28 <zodbot> sgallagh: sgallagh 'Stephen Gallagher' <sgallagh@redhat.com> 15:00:28 <nirik> morning 15:00:32 <contyk> .hello psabata 15:00:32 <mhroncok> .hello churchyard 15:00:32 <zodbot> contyk: psabata 'Petr Šabata' <psabata@redhat.com> 15:00:36 <zodbot> mhroncok: churchyard 'Miro Hrončok' <mhroncok@redhat.com> 15:01:03 <bookwar> .hello2 15:01:03 <otaylor> .hello2 15:01:03 <zodbot> bookwar: bookwar 'Aleksandra Fedorova' <alpha@bookwar.info> 15:01:07 <zodbot> otaylor: otaylor 'Owen Taylor' <otaylor@redhat.com> 15:01:19 <zbyszek> That's 6...7...8...9, wow. 15:01:25 <zbyszek> Let's roll. 15:01:28 <zbyszek> #topic #2241 F32 Self-Contained Change: Better Thermal Management for the Workstation 15:01:31 <zbyszek> .fesco 2241 15:01:32 <zodbot> zbyszek: Issue #2241: F32 Self-Contained Change: Better Thermal Management for the Workstation - fesco - Pagure.io - https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2241 15:01:51 <ignatenkobrain_> .hello2 15:01:52 <zodbot> ignatenkobrain_: Sorry, but you don't exist 15:01:57 <ignatenkobrain_> .hello2 ignatenkobrain 15:02:03 <ignatenkobrain_> .hello ignatenkobrain 15:02:04 <zodbot> ignatenkobrain_: Sorry, but you don't exist 15:02:07 <zodbot> ignatenkobrain_: ignatenkobrain 'Igor Gnatenko' <i.gnatenko.brain@gmail.com> 15:02:08 <zbyszek> Hmm, apparently I can't count to 9. Sorry ignatenkobrain_ 15:02:18 <ignatenkobrain_> =) 15:02:27 <sgallagh> zbyszek: Still running an early Pentium? 15:02:39 <nirik> still no word from change owner(s)? 15:02:44 * sgallagh wonders if that joke still works or if everyone else on FESCo are too young to get it now 15:03:10 <mhroncok> sgallagh: we still get it 15:03:20 <zbyszek> sgallagh: it rings a bell 15:03:23 <sgallagh> In that case: I apologize 15:03:53 <mhroncok> Proposal: The change is rejected 15:04:10 <ignatenkobrain_> +1 to mhroncok 15:04:15 <zbyszek> +1 15:04:17 <nirik> perhaps we could bump the thread on the list and give them a week? 15:04:45 <ignatenkobrain_> I actually think somebody replied 15:04:48 <sgallagh> They've had time and based on the list discussion I think it's not ready 15:04:48 <nirik> actually they did reply to ignatenkobrain_ 15:04:51 <ignatenkobrain_> let me quickly check 15:04:57 <sgallagh> +1 to reject for F32 15:05:20 <sgallagh> (Please remind them that they can resubmit for F33 if they resolve the raised issues) 15:05:32 <ignatenkobrain_> Christian Kellner replied to the thread after all 15:05:40 <mhroncok> they can even resubmit on f32 if they resolve the raised issues 15:05:54 <ignatenkobrain_> but I think the right action is to reject now and thye can resubmit it 15:06:08 <mhroncok> the deadlines are in December 15:07:10 * nirik isn't sure what info we are not wanting to update... 15:07:16 * contyk is distracted by a meeting 15:07:52 <nirik> I guess the change should at least say that they want to ship a db and not mention the non free tool 15:08:11 <zbyszek> Hmm, I think nirik has a point 15:08:18 <ignatenkobrain_> On Mon, 2019-09-23 at 16:29 +0200, Igor Gnatenko wrote: 15:08:18 <ignatenkobrain_> > So what are we going to do about this in F32? Are we going to create 15:08:18 <ignatenkobrain_> > configuration files or we will provide some page how to create it 15:08:19 <ignatenkobrain_> > yourself? Does Intel provide one? 15:08:19 <ignatenkobrain_> The idea, as already mentioned by Hans in another thread, was to indeed 15:08:21 <ignatenkobrain_> to both: 1) to have a separate package that includes configuration 15:08:23 <ignatenkobrain_> files for different systems and then have thermald pick up the right 15:08:25 <ignatenkobrain_> configuration for current system. 2) Additionally we were discussing a 15:08:27 <ignatenkobrain_> way for users to submit such files to be included. But the this is an 15:08:29 <ignatenkobrain_> optional step and could be done later as well. 15:08:42 * nirik nods 15:08:44 <ignatenkobrain_> that's what they wrote as a reply. So to me it is clear that it is not ready at this point, but rather on the "ideas" 15:09:13 <zbyszek> So... should we ask them to clarity the implementation and the tradeoffs ( 15:09:14 <jforbes> Right, I would be fine with the change given that, and the implementation of not starting thermald if a valid entry for the machine wasn't present. He mentioned such in the ticket 15:09:20 <jforbes> err in the thread 15:09:25 <zbyszek> free vs. non-free software, local vs remote db, etc.) ? 15:09:53 <nirik> the change page needs updating/more info for sure. 15:10:17 <zbyszek> counter-proposal: ask the change owners to fill in the change page, revisit in two weeks 15:10:25 <nirik> +1 15:10:26 <mhroncok> zbyszek: +1 15:10:27 <bookwar> zbyszek: +1 15:10:31 <ignatenkobrain_> zbyszek, +1 15:10:38 <contyk> +1 15:10:46 <jforbes> +1 15:11:05 <otaylor> +1 15:11:12 <sgallagh> zbyszek: +1 15:11:20 <zbyszek> #agreed Ask the change owners to fill in the change page, revisit in two weeks (+9, 0, 0) 15:11:29 <zbyszek> #topic #2246 Create a rule to get newly Fedora branched composes sooner 15:11:32 <zbyszek> .fesco 2246 15:11:33 <zodbot> zbyszek: Issue #2246: Create a rule to get newly Fedora branched composes sooner - fesco - Pagure.io - https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2246 15:12:26 * nirik is sorry we got to discussing in ticket... ;( 15:12:37 <mhroncok> so what I think needs to happen: discussion on devel, specific proposal for fesco 15:12:51 <mhroncok> what happened: discussion on devel, new discussion on fesco ticket :( 15:13:17 <mhroncok> I don't mind dicsussin specific proposals at fesco level at all 15:13:19 <nirik> yeah, lets perhaps try and go back to list? I can restart things there and point to the ticket? 15:13:24 <mhroncok> but there is no specific proposal IMHO 15:13:30 <sgallagh> ack 15:13:51 <zbyszek> nirik: sounds good 15:14:17 <nirik> and perhaps try and cull something more specific out of the ticket 15:14:52 <zbyszek> #action nirik to restart the discussion on fedora-devel 15:15:17 <zbyszek> Yeah, I don't think we should try to discuss this here, it's more appropriate for fedora-devel and releng lists... 15:15:24 <zbyszek> Let's move on. 15:15:29 <zbyszek> #topic #2230 FESCo blocker bug: Broken upgrades via libgit2 15:15:29 <zbyszek> .fesco 2230 15:15:30 <zodbot> zbyszek: Issue #2230: FESCo blocker bug: Broken upgrades via libgit2 - fesco - Pagure.io - https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2230 15:15:39 <mhroncok> note, there is a new comment 15:15:55 <sgallagh> I don't think it's FESCo's job to litigate the solution. 15:16:00 <nirik> I think the dnf hack is fine. 15:16:19 <sgallagh> We agreed that the problem needed to be solved. 15:16:34 <mhroncok> sgallagh: and we agreed that we'll cote again baout the proposed solution 15:16:39 <mhroncok> *vote 15:16:57 <ignatenkobrain_> +1 to the workaround in dnf. 15:17:04 <mhroncok> (and that was good, becasue the first attempt was clearly not good) 15:17:17 <sgallagh> I personally don't give a damn which of the two proposals we implement. 15:17:23 <mhroncok> there are 3 things to vote on basically 15:17:26 * nirik sees not much activity on the packagekit/gnome-software end. ;( 15:17:53 <mhroncok> nirik: and I'm afraid that we won't see nay if it's not decided as a fesco blocker 15:17:58 <mhroncok> *any 15:18:07 <ignatenkobrain_> isn't dnf hack is enough for gnome-software? 15:18:26 <sgallagh> ignatenkobrain_: No, because it's at the DNF layer, not the libdnf layert 15:18:32 <ignatenkobrain_> ah, I see 15:18:34 <ignatenkobrain_> right 15:19:14 <sgallagh> If carrying the compat package forward is all that is needed to resolve this, that seems pretty simple and uncontroversial. 15:19:23 <ignatenkobrain_> I am fine (as libgit2 maintainer) to add libgit2_0.28 package in f31 but only if somebody will fix this issue during the lifecycle of f31. otherwise we will have to keep this workaround forewer 15:19:26 <jforbes> agreed 15:19:27 <mhroncok> sgallagh: it has caveats 15:19:30 <ignatenkobrain_> s/forewer/forever/ 15:19:53 <ignatenkobrain_> or, rather, until f34 15:20:15 <sgallagh> ignatenkobrain_: Honestly, the compat package approach is probably the correct one for libgit2, since it has numerous dependents that don't all move at the same time. 15:20:19 <nirik> well, dnf already hacked around it, seems like a shame to keep the compat thing another cycle 15:20:34 <ignatenkobrain_> sgallagh, well, there is libgit2, libgit2_0.27, libgit2_0.26 15:20:45 <ignatenkobrain_> packaging guidelines say that unversioned one should be the latest 15:21:04 <sgallagh> ignatenkobrain_: If there *is* an unversioned one, yes. 15:21:15 <sgallagh> I'd suggest that it should just always be versioned and leave it at that 15:21:38 <mhroncok> the dnf workaround is the good kind of workaround 15:21:50 <sgallagh> mhroncok: How do you mean? 15:21:57 <mhroncok> it just works 15:22:02 <mhroncok> it does exactly what we want 15:22:10 <ignatenkobrain_> I would appreciate if somebody would actually look at the issue with gnome-software. Otherwise we will never fix this issue. 15:22:28 * nirik was going to ask kalev, but he's not online at the moment. 15:22:32 <nirik> I can do so later tho 15:22:41 <mhroncok> the compat package workaround: shifts the problem to the next release. removes the ability to dnf install libgit2 15:22:55 <zbyszek> Hmm, I think the idea to create libgit2_0.28 is OK. 15:23:03 <ignatenkobrain_> mhroncok, well, it will have to stay until F34 15:23:04 <mhroncok> note that it cannot provide libgit2 15:23:09 <ignatenkobrain_> because F31 → F33 upgrade path 15:23:20 <mhroncok> ignatenkobrain: and what happens at that point? 15:23:40 <sgallagh> mhroncok: Why is that an issue? 15:23:40 <zbyszek> mhroncok: "removes the ability to dnf install libgit2 15:24:18 <zbyszek> mhroncok: "removes the ability to dnf install libgit2" — are you sure? If you do 'dnf module reset...' you should be able to install either libgit2 or libgit2_0.28. 15:24:24 <zbyszek> ... IIUC. 15:24:43 <zbyszek> If you don't do 'dnf module reset ...', then only the second one. 15:24:44 <mhroncok> zbyszek: so, libgit2 module is no more, correct? 15:24:48 <nirik> well, the module would need a module install... 15:24:58 <mhroncok> or at least no default stream 15:25:13 <mhroncok> but users have it still enabled and it juts blocks anything thatvprovides libgit2 15:25:21 <zbyszek> Jaroslav wrote: F31: Module "libgit2" has no default stream 15:25:26 <mhroncok> so we need to remember: never provie libgit2 15:25:27 <nirik> right 15:25:30 <ignatenkobrain_> Proposal: #action nirik to ask kalev about workaround in packagekit/gnome-software and block release on this fix. If it is complicated, ignatenkobrain will create libgit2_0.28 package. 15:25:44 <mhroncok> it is complicated 15:25:51 <mhroncok> I think that we can all agree on 15:26:04 <nirik> mhroncok: sure, but in theory it should be able to do the same thing dnf did 15:26:11 <nirik> ignatenkobrain_: +1 15:26:12 <mhroncok> and it should 15:26:19 <contyk> ignatenkobrain_: +1 15:26:33 <zbyszek> True, but even with both dnf and gnome-software patches, we don't cover all upgrade paths... 15:26:36 <zbyszek> ignatenkobrain_: +1 15:26:44 <jforbes> ignatenkobrain_: +1 15:26:47 <nirik> but we likely need to know really soon... since even making the package and adding it could take a day or two, then we need a compose and all testing, etc. 15:27:16 <nirik> zbyszek: you mean distro-sync/upgrade bare from dnf? 15:27:24 <zbyszek> nirik: yes 15:27:27 <mhroncok> -1, the module reset woraround is clearly superior to the compat package and if we allow the compat package, it just means nobody would do the reset IMHO 15:27:56 <mhroncok> also, as soon as we do that, dnf will likely try to drop their hack 15:27:58 <sgallagh> I'm going to vote 0 here. I see benefits to either approach. 15:28:05 <zbyszek> mhroncok: but isn't the module reset already in updates-testing? I understood the compat package to be an addition on top. 15:28:16 <mhroncok> and instead of good, worse, we will end up with worse, worse 15:28:29 <mhroncok> zbyszek: it is in updatest testing, yes 15:28:40 <nirik> well, there will have to be a hack sometime, although I suppose over time it would affect less people 15:28:56 <mhroncok> as long as we don't reset the stream 15:29:06 <mhroncok> it will affect everybody who was ever affected, until they reinstall 15:29:18 <nirik> sure, but fresh f31 installs won't be affeected 15:29:45 * zbyszek counts 15:30:08 <mhroncok> nirik: yes, either way 15:30:26 <mhroncok> the reset solution also has a limited scope 15:30:55 <mhroncok> even if we don't solve the modular upgrade path in a general way during f32, we just change the if conditional for 31 or 32 and the hack dies with F30 EOL 15:31:24 <zbyszek> so we're at +5, 1, -1 15:31:36 <mhroncok> while the compat package means dragging the hack until we solve this properly, which we cannot promise we will 15:31:38 <nirik> who hasn't voted. ;) 15:32:11 <zbyszek> otaylor, bookwar ? 15:32:33 <nirik> mhroncok: I agree the compat package is undesireable... but I don't know if it's worth slipping if we can't solve the gnome-software case soon... 15:32:44 <mhroncok> we can 15:32:51 <mhroncok> if we make people to do it 15:33:02 <mhroncok> this was known for months 15:33:02 <sgallagh> s/can't/don't/ 15:33:15 <mhroncok> the dnf repsonse was CANTFIX 15:33:29 <mhroncok> if fesco haven't mede it a blocker, it would not be fixed there 15:33:29 <nirik> sure, we can, I am just saying I don't think we should. But thats just me.... 15:33:57 <zbyszek> OK, #agreed (+5, 1, -1) 15:34:03 <zbyszek> #agreed (+5, 1, -1) 15:34:10 <ignatenkobrain_> in the worst case, I'll ask sgallagh to maintain this compat package :) 15:34:13 <bookwar> +1 too, sorry 15:34:18 <jforbes> nirik: I agree with you on that point in particular 15:34:29 <zbyszek> #action nirik to ask kalev about workaround in packagekit/gnome-software and block release on this fix. If it is complicated, ignatenkobrain will create libgit2_0.28 package. 15:34:47 <sgallagh> ignatenkobrain_: I accept that condition 15:35:13 <zbyszek> I would like to see all three solutions in place... 15:35:36 * nirik would like to avoid the compat package 15:35:53 * ignatenkobrain_ too 15:36:10 <zbyszek> #topic Next week's chair 15:36:24 <zbyszek> volunteers? 15:36:42 <mhroncok> it's a holiday in CZ 15:36:43 * contyk is on vacation for the next three meetings 15:37:01 <mhroncok> I'll be able to join from a cellphone, but not chair 15:37:21 <ignatenkobrain_> I can chair 15:37:30 <pingou> contyk: enjoy! 15:37:46 <zbyszek> #action ignatenkobrain_ to chair next meeting 15:37:52 <ignatenkobrain_> :beers: 15:37:52 <contyk> pingou: thanks! 15:37:53 <zbyszek> #topic Open Floor 15:37:58 <ignatenkobrain_> zbyszek++ 15:38:10 <nirik> I had a quick item... 15:38:32 <zbyszek> nirik: go ahead 15:38:40 * sgallagh fears that phrase 15:38:55 <mhroncok> :D 15:39:04 <nirik> rawhide multipackage gating is needing testing... would it be ok to add 2 dummy packages to the collection to use for this? They could even be something like uuid's... just one package that depends on another? 15:39:37 <ignatenkobrain_> I can offer some of my packages for such testing :) 15:39:42 <sgallagh> nirik: I see no problem with that. We can Obsoletes and remove them later 15:39:42 <zbyszek> Can't you just use some normal package? 15:40:01 <ignatenkobrain_> also, isn't it possible to test it in stg? 15:40:02 <sgallagh> Or use ignatenkobrain_'s wild rust stuff 15:40:05 <nirik> if there's some normal ones we could use thats fine... I just don't know of any off hand that might not disrupt users. 15:40:06 <mhroncok> we can name them something cool, so we can do dnf install happiness 15:40:13 <ignatenkobrain_> sgallagh, that's exactly what I meant 15:40:18 <ignatenkobrain_> nirik, I have 800+ rust ones :) 15:40:48 <nirik> sure, but they need to be rebuilt a lot of times per day... if there's a pair like that let me know and we can use those. ;) 15:41:16 <ignatenkobrain_> nirik, just ping me later the day and we will arrange :) 15:41:28 <mhroncok> nirik: or use libgit, it's already fubar :D 15:41:29 <nirik> ok, cool. 15:41:33 <nirik> ha ha ha 15:41:34 <ignatenkobrain_> mhroncok, lol 15:41:48 <ignatenkobrain_> don't call my packages fubar! 15:41:55 * ignatenkobrain_ runs away 15:41:57 <pingou> dnf install fubar? 15:41:59 <zbyszek> So... what's the best place to read up on the rawhide gating? 15:42:26 <ignatenkobrain_> pingou, doesn't work =( 15:42:36 <nirik> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GatingRawhidePackages 15:42:37 <sgallagh> zbyszek: It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard'. 15:42:41 <sgallagh> Didn't you see it? :) 15:42:43 <pingou> zbyszek: currently mostly the wiki 15:42:52 <pingou> the original proposal 15:43:27 <bookwar> we have a ci space in fedora docs 15:43:35 <bookwar> fedora-ci/docs repo on pagure 15:43:51 <bookwar> we need to consolidate docs there 15:44:24 <bookwar> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/ci/ 15:44:36 <pingou> https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/issues/2322 15:44:42 <pingou> is the ticket about docs 15:45:07 <zbyszek> Thanks. 15:45:33 <zbyszek> Do we want to talk about Modularit or is the discussion on fedora-devel enough? 15:46:01 <mhroncok> I wouldn't mind to meta talk about it 15:46:04 <ignatenkobrain_> :kill_it_with_fire: 15:46:30 <sgallagh> contyk: and I are working something up to put on the list today. 15:46:37 <mhroncok> ignatenkobrain_: modularity or the dicussion? 15:46:46 <sgallagh> I'd prefer to hold off on more circular discussion until we do that, if that's alright 15:46:53 <zbyszek> sgallagh: +1 15:46:55 <contyk> likewise 15:46:55 <ignatenkobrain_> I haven't had a chance to go through the list and read it yet, so I'm not entirely ready to vote on anything related 15:46:59 <ignatenkobrain_> mhroncok, both :) 15:47:20 <contyk> I need to catch up with the latest mails in that thread, too 15:47:24 <zbyszek> OK, anyone has anything else then? 15:47:38 <jforbes> nothing here 15:47:39 <ignatenkobrain_> contyk, latest 170 emails? :) 15:48:03 <mhroncok> ignatenkobrain_: oh, it's just that few? most of them are duplicates anyway 15:48:06 <contyk> ignatenkobrain_: ~80 :) 15:48:16 * sgallagh sighs 15:48:22 <zbyszek> I'll close in a minute... 15:48:32 * sgallagh has actually read them all, much to his regret... 15:48:44 * nirik ran a 'how many posters in this thread' last week... it was pretty small. ;) 15:48:47 <ignatenkobrain_> sgallagh, don't regret, enjoy :) 15:48:49 <contyk> sgallagh++ 15:49:35 <zbyszek> Thanks all. 15:49:37 <zbyszek> #endmeeting