16:00:18 #startmeeting Stewardship SIG Meeting (2020-01-21) 16:00:18 Meeting started Tue Jan 21 16:00:18 2020 UTC. 16:00:18 This meeting is logged and archived in a public location. 16:00:18 The chair is decathorpe. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:00:18 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 16:00:18 The meeting name has been set to 'stewardship_sig_meeting_(2020-01-21)' 16:00:22 #meetingname stewardship-sig 16:00:22 The meeting name has been set to 'stewardship-sig' 16:00:26 #topic Roll Call 16:01:12 cipherboy, sillebille: Meeting Time 16:01:20 \o hello 16:01:27 hello! o/ 16:01:31 #chair sillebille 16:01:31 Current chairs: decathorpe sillebille 16:02:08 i've been sloppy for the past few weeks due to deadlines and other things in the plate. I hope I'll get more time in the coming weeks :) 16:02:25 no worries, we're all busy with $LIFE and $DAYJOB 16:02:44 decathorpe++ Thanks 16:04:02 I'll wait until :05 to start the meeting 16:05:44 #topic Review Open BugZilla tickets 16:05:49 #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?bug_status=__open__&email1=stewardship-sig%40lists.fedoraproject.org&emailassigned_to1=1&emailcc1=1&emailtype1=substring&list_id=10281127&product=Fedora&query_format=advanced 16:06:04 we're down to less than 2 pages of bugs, which is good 16:06:17 there's also only one open CVE, which is probably WONTFIX 16:06:40 cipherboy and me are part of another meeting. He should show up soon 16:06:51 oh, ok. I can wait :) 16:06:59 .nextmeetings 16:06:59 decathorpe: One moment, please... Looking up the channel list. 16:07:02 decathorpe: In #fedora-admin is Fedora Infra Ops Daily Standup (starting in 2 hours) 16:07:04 decathorpe: In #fedora-meeting-1 is Server SIG (starting in 4 hours) 16:07:07 decathorpe: In #fedora-meeting is G11N (starting in 12 hours) 16:07:10 decathorpe: In #fedora-meeting is Magazine editorial board (starting in 20 hours) 16:07:14 decathorpe: In #fedora-meeting-1 is FPgM office hours (starting in 21 hours) 16:07:22 yeah, that's some good news 16:07:31 looks like we can the channel for 4 hours yet ;) 16:07:36 also, i see few PRs already addressing few of those BZs 16:07:47 true 16:07:49 LOL. You sure? We are in Eastern time zone ;) 16:08:15 no, not sure at all 16:08:26 haha 16:09:03 ok. So, once the PRs get reviewed and merged, we should get the BZ # to a page. :) 16:09:33 yeah, that could be our next goal 16:09:47 almost every bug is a rebase. I was thinkign whether we should start experimenting with packit.dev? 16:10:01 that won't help us :( 16:10:21 it's supposed to be integrated into upstream projects 16:10:46 well, we could try submitting a PR to the project. Would they be against it? 16:11:04 you can try submitting things into Apache JIRA so they push things into SVN 16:11:05 :D 16:11:20 lol 16:11:39 so .. probably not 16:11:59 ok :( 16:13:11 I'll try to work on a few version updates starting next week. 16:14:08 aye. 16:14:42 I will start by reviewing the open PRs this week .. 16:15:12 I'll also make a list of packages where we need help from some real Java person :) 16:15:37 ok 16:16:07 any other comments about open bugs? 16:16:48 (silly) question: are we going to rebase all the components listed in the BZ? 16:17:06 *are we planning to? 16:17:29 if it is possible, yes 16:17:38 roger that. 16:17:45 some things contain breaking changes, which I won't push into fedora 16:18:04 ok 16:18:18 i have nothing else on the BZ topic. cipherboy? 16:18:18 #topic Open Pull Requests 16:18:24 #link https://decathorpe.fedorapeople.org/stewardship-sig-prs.html 16:18:39 I don't think there's anything interesting in BZ 16:19:06 regarding PRs: jackson 2.10.2 updates are good to go 16:19:12 junit 4.13.0 is good to go 16:19:18 log4j 2.13.0 was merged and built 16:19:33 sisu 0.3.4 is good to go 16:19:42 apache-parent 22 is good to go 16:20:06 everything else either causes issues with other packages, or has merge conflicts. 16:21:12 i had a quick dry run on few of the PRs but did not post any comments. Everything were all straight-forward rebases... 16:21:31 If you want to wait, I'll post the comments today or tomorrow. Or feel free to merge :) 16:21:49 slf4j hasn't been rebased. Should we poke at it again? :) 16:22:00 sillebille: thanks, I'd like to have some form of documented "ACK" for the PRs 16:22:08 yeah poke slf4j ... 16:23:33 done 16:23:56 and for the "ACK", i'll do it soon... :) 16:24:32 thanks! 16:25:11 decathorpe: Sorry, I'm here. 16:25:12 #topic Review SIG Leaf Packages 16:25:18 #chair cipherboy 16:25:18 Current chairs: cipherboy decathorpe sillebille 16:25:19 o/ 16:25:23 \o 16:25:27 Was busy in other meeting. 16:25:33 no problem 16:25:33 Glad sillebille remembered :-) 16:25:42 #link https://decathorpe.fedorapeople.org/stewardship-sig.html#sig-leaves 16:25:47 #link https://pagure.io/stewardship-sig/issue/68 16:26:06 Leaves I think look fine as-is, I wouldn't drop anything right now. 16:26:19 proposal: we close issue 68, and wait until the next round of orphans is retired 16:26:27 +1 16:27:56 cipherboy: thanks for the log4j and junit PRs 16:28:15 #topic Open Floor 16:29:10 decathorpe: np. Is there something else you want me to look at next? 16:29:34 I am planning to start experimenting packit.dev on PKI next month 16:29:39 i have nothing else to discuss :) 16:30:36 there are some patch-level version rebases pending, which I didn't yet have the time to get to. they should be easy 16:31:53 e.g. velocity-parsers 2.8.3 → 2.8.4, woodstox-core 6.0.2 → 6.0.3, qdox 2.0~M9 → 2.0.0 16:32:29 maven-enforcer 3.0.0~M2 → 3.0.0~M3 16:32:58 ACK, I can take a look at those. 16:33:43 great, thanks 16:33:52 those 4 should be pretty straightforward. 16:34:41 we can also steal some work from the modular branches :) 16:36:13 one more thing: mbooth asked whether we can unretire xmlrpc on rawhide and f31, it's the last package that's blocking eclipse 16:42:03 hmmm. Upstream xmlrpc project has been discontinued ? 16:42:56 I'd be fine taking xmlrpc in support of non-modular eclipse. 16:43:21 But I worry that there might not be a good migration plan to/from modular/non-modular, especially considering gimp having issues. 16:43:36 decathorpe: Do you want me to update the spec and you do the review? 16:43:56 cipherboy: yeah, sure 16:44:14 Note that there are two open CVEs against xmlrpc 16:44:27 decathorpe: Yuck. And upstream is dead? sillebille -- do you know if they fixed it? 16:44:33 but I think we can ignore those for local use ... 16:45:06 cipherboy, I can't seem to downlaod tar nor access svn: http://ws.apache.org/xmlrpc/download.html 16:45:29 there is an archive available here: http://archive.apache.org/dist/ws/xmlrpc/ 16:46:29 [ ] apache-xmlrpc-current-src.zip 2013-01-31 16:06 361K 16:46:35 That's a little old. 16:47:04 yeah. May be the project died. : 16:47:06 :\ 16:47:18 uhm. yeah. 16:47:44 the /sources/ directory has correctly named tarballs, btw. 16:47:56 (3.1.3, not "current") 16:48:29 last module build includes 3.1.3 16:48:52 Wah, I was in another meeting and could not appear from out of the ether at the mention of Eclipse 16:49:40 I'm actually thinking of dropping eclipse-mylyn because of it;s use of this comedy old and insecurity library 16:49:41 Hmmm -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1775193 -- lots of internal comments there, but there is a public proposed patch we could review and use. 16:50:14 mbooth: Yeah, I think that'd be best. I don't particularly like maintaining unmaintained code bases... :-) 16:51:03 Mylyn has nothing that particularly benefits from being packaged (non native bits, no requirement for deep integration with the host system) 16:51:51 mbooth: Yeah, can you pull it in as a plugin? 16:52:15 And users can still install it via p2 or the Eclipse Market Place client from the upstream plug-in repositories 16:52:23 If they really want it 16:52:32 * mbooth doesn't use it, TBH 16:52:36 Yeah, +1 to that. 16:52:43 +1 16:53:04 great 16:53:06 :) 16:53:11 Thanks mbooth! 16:53:54 Well, fewer RPMs is better. 16:53:59 mbooth++ 16:54:05 * mbooth tries to get his package load below 100 16:54:52 I'm trying to keep mine below 400 ... 16:55:19 Eclipse platform itself counts for like 300, I'm sure :-p 16:55:38 I'm taking your word for it :-) 16:57:50 alright, is there anything else? otherwise I'd close the meeting on time 16:59:09 i don't have any :) 17:00:25 #endmeeting