16:31:13 <bgilbert> #startmeeting fedora_coreos_meeting
16:31:13 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed Mar 31 16:31:13 2021 UTC.
16:31:13 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
16:31:13 <zodbot> The chair is bgilbert. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:31:13 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
16:31:13 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fedora_coreos_meeting'
16:31:16 <bgilbert> #topic roll call
16:31:23 <cyberpear> .hi
16:31:25 <zodbot> cyberpear: cyberpear 'James Cassell' <fedoraproject@cyberpear.com>
16:31:25 <travier> .hello siosm
16:31:28 <zodbot> travier: siosm 'Timothée Ravier' <travier@redhat.com>
16:31:52 <PanGoat> .hello jaimelm
16:31:53 <zodbot> PanGoat: jaimelm 'Jaime Magiera' <jaimelm@umich.edu>
16:31:56 <jlebon> .hello2
16:31:58 <zodbot> jlebon: jlebon 'None' <jonathan@jlebon.com>
16:32:12 <dustymabe> .hello2
16:32:13 <zodbot> dustymabe: dustymabe 'Dusty Mabe' <dusty@dustymabe.com>
16:32:37 <jlebon> #chair dustymabe bgilbert
16:32:41 <bgilbert> #chair cyberpear travier PanGoat jlebon dustymabe
16:32:41 <zodbot> Current chairs: PanGoat bgilbert cyberpear dustymabe jlebon travier
16:32:41 * sumantro is here
16:32:47 <jlebon> #chair sumantro
16:32:47 <zodbot> Current chairs: PanGoat bgilbert cyberpear dustymabe jlebon sumantro travier
16:32:48 <slowrie> .hello2
16:32:49 <dustymabe> 👋 sumantro
16:32:49 <zodbot> slowrie: slowrie 'Stephen Lowrie' <slowrie@redhat.com>
16:32:55 <sumantro> dustymabe, hey!!
16:33:05 <jlebon> #chair slowrie
16:33:05 <zodbot> Current chairs: PanGoat bgilbert cyberpear dustymabe jlebon slowrie sumantro travier
16:33:13 <jbrooks> .hello jasonbrooks
16:33:14 <zodbot> jbrooks: jasonbrooks 'Jason Brooks' <jbrooks@redhat.com>
16:33:41 <jlebon> #chair jbrooks
16:33:41 <zodbot> Current chairs: PanGoat bgilbert cyberpear dustymabe jbrooks jlebon slowrie sumantro travier
16:35:03 <PanGoat> Since I don't have privs to label, I'll just mention that I have an item regarding https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-docs/issues/257
16:35:15 <walters> .hello2
16:35:15 <zodbot> walters: walters 'Colin Walters' <walters@redhat.com>
16:35:17 <jlebon> bgilbert: so am I driving this?
16:35:24 <jlebon> #chair walters
16:35:24 <zodbot> Current chairs: PanGoat bgilbert cyberpear dustymabe jbrooks jlebon slowrie sumantro travier walters
16:36:01 * jlebon assumes yes
16:36:05 <jlebon> #topic Action items from last meeting
16:36:13 <travier> 😅
16:36:14 <bgilbert> jlebon: yep
16:36:23 <jlebon> so last week we had the joint FCOS/podman meeting led by travier
16:36:36 <jlebon> there's a bunch of things that came out of that, but we don't have to go over them here
16:36:52 <jlebon> thanks a lot travier for managing that, it was very productive i think!
16:36:57 <travier> I don't think we have any major decision to take right now
16:36:58 <cyberpear> recording posted from last week?
16:37:16 <dustymabe> travier: one thing that came out was migration to cgroups v2
16:37:16 <travier> #link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xOEroULZ5w
16:37:23 <cyberpear> 🎉
16:37:24 <dustymabe> did we manage to land that in the f34 rebase?
16:37:53 <jlebon> right, worth highlighting that no decisions were taken because we want to do it through the community mtg
16:37:57 <jlebon> dustymabe: that's the next topic :)
16:38:06 <dustymabe> ahh k
16:38:17 <jlebon> anything else to add on this subject otherwise?
16:38:38 <travier> I still have on my todo list to summarize the update & size requests into issues
16:38:48 <travier> but this is not major
16:38:56 <jlebon> travier++
16:38:58 <travier> #link https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/768
16:39:22 <jlebon> #info the FCOS/podman joint meeting went well
16:39:43 <jlebon> #action travier  to summarize outcome in https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/768
16:39:51 <jlebon> ok, let's move on
16:40:11 <jlebon> #topic cgroups v2 strategy
16:40:14 <jlebon> #link https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/292
16:40:26 <jlebon> so `next` is now on f34
16:40:38 <jlebon> it has new moby-engine, which supports cgroupsv2
16:41:05 <jlebon> so we can now move next to default to cgroupsv2
16:41:23 <jlebon> this is what https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-config/pull/910 does
16:41:52 <jlebon> i'm proposing doing this for the next release
16:42:11 <jlebon> (the next release of next that is)
16:42:15 <travier> We also need to update the docs for this change.
16:42:31 <jlebon> we'll need to publicize the change as well
16:42:34 <dustymabe> +1
16:43:03 <jlebon> to be clear, the strategy is that upgrading nodes will stay on v1, and only new nodes will default on v2
16:43:10 <dustymabe> anybody think of reasons to not do this?
16:43:26 <jlebon> we'll want docs for upgrading nodes which want to move to v2, and new nodes which want to move to v1 for whatever reason
16:43:32 <PanGoat> ^^
16:43:33 <sumantro> dustymabe, publishing the change sounds good
16:43:51 <travier> #link https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-docs/issues/267
16:43:55 <travier> just filed that one
16:44:58 <jlebon> travier: let's try to do that this week and send an email linking to it, so there's enough advance notice for the release in two weeks
16:45:11 <travier> Will do
16:45:42 <copperi_> what list do you send info on ?
16:46:08 <jlebon> bgilbert: how do you feel about timing? i know you like more lead time usually :)
16:46:11 <dustymabe> copperi_: coreos-status and coreos-devel
16:46:15 <dustymabe> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/coreos-status@lists.fedoraproject.org/
16:46:27 <dustymabe> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/coreos@lists.fedoraproject.org/
16:46:45 <copperi_> Thanks
16:47:09 <bgilbert> jlebon: eh, I don't think we need a lot of lead time to change _next_ in a way that doesn't affect upgrades
16:47:28 <jlebon> +1 agreed
16:47:30 <slowrie> jlebon: from my perspective I think we're basically free to do whatever we want on next; the stream itself disappears/reappears so it's unlikely that anyone is expecting consistent behavior on it if they're running nodes there
16:47:32 <bgilbert> but a couple months for stable would be nice
16:48:17 <jlebon> slowrie: to clarify, it doesn't disappear, it's just that it matches testing most of the time
16:48:24 * dustymabe wonders if it would be useful to have a console-login-helper-message that tells you if you are on cgroups v1 or v2
16:48:29 <bgilbert> dustymabe: +1
16:48:43 <copperi_> dustymabe: +1
16:48:59 <PanGoat> dustymabe: +1
16:49:00 <dustymabe> :0
16:49:02 <slowrie> jlebon: did that change; I roughly recall that at one point we just didn't publish new images for it and existing nodes pulled updates from testing
16:49:05 <dustymabe> oops meant :)
16:50:06 <jlebon> dustymabe: maybe just if you're on v1 ?
16:50:33 <travier> jlebon: +1
16:50:41 <dustymabe> yeah, I don't mind it for both for now, but I see why that would be useful
16:51:22 <jlebon> slowrie: nahh, we've always rebuilt it and published its own artifacts
16:51:59 <jlebon> i can see it being helpful for upgrading nodes, but seems odd to default to emitting a message like "hey, you're using a default!" otherwise
16:52:52 <jlebon> we can bikeshed this in tickets maybe :)
16:52:58 <dustymabe> yep
16:53:08 <jlebon> ok, anything else on this?
16:53:55 <jlebon> cool cool
16:53:59 <jlebon> ok next topic
16:54:07 <jlebon> #topic Consider alternating video/IRC meeting for FCOS group meetings
16:54:13 <jlebon> #link https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/779
16:54:23 <jlebon> travier: want to discuss this?
16:54:53 <travier> Sure
16:55:21 <travier> Last week video meeting went rather well so this is a suggestion to move some meeting to video chat
16:55:42 <travier> Probably not all meetings but we can start every other week or monthly or some other frequency
16:55:46 <travier> wdyt?
16:56:08 <bgilbert> a video meeting is much higher-bandwidth for the participants and much worse for the non-participants
16:56:17 <bgilbert> an hour-long recording is basically inaccessible
16:56:35 <travier> agree
16:56:40 <bgilbert> if we'd like to try this, we should make sure to post minutes, preferably with timestamps for each topic
16:56:41 <dustymabe> The IRC meetings have a lot of benefits, but so do video. Different tradeoffs. I'd prefer to keep most meetings like they currently are
16:57:01 <PanGoat> maybe quarterly, sort of a recap and see people meeting.
16:57:09 <dustymabe> maybe once a month or bi-monthly video meetings with targetted goals?
16:57:22 <sumantro> once a month sounds good
16:57:28 <bgilbert> +1 to trying once/month
16:57:31 * cyberpear listens to the recording on 2x speed :P
16:57:40 <PanGoat> +1 1/month
16:58:08 <slowrie> I'd personally lean towards having it be more of a special setup where if we have things that need the extra bandwidth we go through that process but I can live with whatever
16:58:10 <copperi_> irc meetings are easier to read but video can bring other benefits 1/month
16:58:32 <jlebon> slowrie: +1  that's where i lean too i think
16:58:36 <jbrooks> +1
16:58:38 <dustymabe> slowrie: +1 - I was just thinking if we didn't have a healthy set of topics for video meeting then it might be a bit lean
16:58:59 <cyberpear> best to record any video meeting IMO (Workstation WG don't record theirs, which is annoying)
16:59:08 <bgilbert> there are also different accessibility limitations.  IRC is obscure by modern standards, and conversely, some folks may not want/be able to participate in a live meeting
16:59:37 <PanGoat> You can't play back IRC while working on something else.
16:59:50 <slowrie> you can skim the chat log though
16:59:52 <PanGoat> well, you can with text-to-speech, but it would be weird :)
16:59:59 <PanGoat> right, but that's active
17:00:06 <PanGoat> not passie
17:00:08 <PanGoat> passive*
17:00:17 <jlebon> chat logs have highlights to make this relatively fast
17:00:24 <jlebon> all the #info and stuff
17:00:33 <travier> Having be "when it's needed" is interesting but needs to be planned in advance
17:01:00 <travier> which makes it harder :/
17:01:06 <slowrie> travier: Yes, I'd assume it'd be done when something is marked as a meeting topic and it's known it's particularly contentious / needs a lot of additional bandwidth for the discussion
17:01:26 <PanGoat> Sometimes the good stuff is not what's noted as a bullet point but what went in between. Being new here, I'll defer.
17:01:27 <dustymabe> yeah, a good candidate would be if we invite another team to discuss something
17:01:31 <travier> but I agree that having a video meeting for nothing is not great
17:02:04 <PanGoat> Or a special invite to FCOS users to meet the working group folks.
17:03:03 <dustymabe> one option is to just fill time with "bug scrub" like activities if we have nothing else
17:03:20 <dustymabe> we certainly don't do enough of that today
17:03:23 <PanGoat> those can be effective. We do that occasionally with OKD
17:03:38 <jlebon> what we could do is schedule them as needed, but call it out in the previous week's IRC meeting
17:03:55 <PanGoat> +1 jlebon
17:03:58 <dustymabe> i'm supportive of trying out new things :)
17:04:34 <jlebon> so e.g. i can say "i'd like to discuss cgroupsv2 in a video meeting next week" and if there's agreement, it's scheduled
17:04:36 <PanGoat> the bug scrub and maybe doc scrub would be great.
17:04:39 <copperi_> It is good to try
17:05:26 <PanGoat> e.g. travier has been making lots of doc changes the past few days. It would be helpful to have a video meeting to go over what he, or the group, envisions.
17:06:07 <jlebon> totally cool with just trying it out once a month and see how it goes
17:07:11 <dustymabe> 👍
17:07:15 <jbrooks> once a month doesn't sound onerous
17:07:19 <jlebon> travier: you want to try it out?
17:07:23 <dustymabe> first meeting of month (just to make it easy?)
17:07:34 <dustymabe> though, that would be next week :)
17:07:35 <travier> sure
17:07:39 <sumantro> +1
17:08:16 <jbrooks> +1
17:08:17 <travier> #proposal Setup a monthly video meeting for the Fedora CoreOS group
17:08:21 <jlebon> first meeting of the month SGTM
17:08:32 <cyberpear> +1
17:08:34 <PanGoat> yes
17:08:35 <jlebon> ack
17:08:56 <travier> #proposed Setup a monthly video meeting for the Fedora CoreOS group, planned for the first meeting of the month
17:09:23 <jlebon> travier: we should shoot an email to the list about this too
17:09:36 <travier> sure
17:10:05 <jlebon> +1 to latest
17:11:21 <travier> #agreed Setup a monthly video meeting for the Fedora CoreOS group, planned for the first meeting of the month
17:11:27 <travier> (based on previous =1)
17:11:30 <travier> +1
17:11:51 <jlebon> cool, thanks travier!
17:11:56 <jlebon> let's move on to the next topic
17:11:56 <travier> We can reconsider if that does not turn out well
17:12:26 <jlebon> this is it for tracker issues, but PanGoat you had something?
17:12:52 <PanGoat> yeah... I have some basic ign and text for NFS mounts. I'm unclear where to put them.
17:13:05 <PanGoat> Should all of these types of requests get put in the tutorials?
17:13:13 <jlebon> ok, let's hold that for a second
17:13:39 <jlebon> (and discuss it in open floor)
17:13:43 <PanGoat> sure.
17:13:52 <jlebon> are there any other issues anyone wants to discuss before we move to open floor?
17:14:56 <jlebon> ok doesn't look like it :)
17:14:59 <jlebon> #topic Open Floor
17:15:17 <jlebon> PanGoat: right ok, so you're asking where to put the NFS mount example?
17:15:31 <PanGoat> right, and similar requests that come in.
17:15:37 <PanGoat> "how do I...?"
17:16:06 <dustymabe> I would put it under User Guides -> System Configuration
17:16:36 <dustymabe> i.e. like: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora-coreos/managing-files/
17:16:53 <jlebon> i think if it fits well within an existing category, i'd put it there. for this one, maybe https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora-coreos/storage/ ?
17:17:00 <dustymabe> PanGoat: if you wanted to have a FAQ entry "How do I mount NFS?" and then point to the user guide
17:17:17 <PanGoat> that was my thought. being new around here, not sure about criteria for what shoudl be a tutorial vs. just an entry in sys config
17:17:40 <PanGoat> Yeah, storage makes sense.
17:17:44 <travier> I'd prefer not to add more faq entries pointing to permanent docs
17:17:51 <dustymabe> jlebon: that could work too.. along with a FAQ entry that links to the subsection in storage
17:17:56 <dustymabe> travier: oh?
17:18:02 <PanGoat> travier: what's your thinking
17:18:15 <travier> FAQ entries should be more about specific question rather than doc examples
17:18:29 <travier> (to me)
17:18:43 <travier> otherwise we will end up with all examples as faq entries
17:18:51 <travier> and our faq is already very large
17:18:57 <jlebon> i think a major issue related to this is that AFAICT there's no search function
17:19:05 <dustymabe> i was thinking if the user couldn't find the information otherwise, they go to FAQ and then the FAQ points to the right location in the docs
17:19:14 <PanGoat> jlebon +1
17:19:24 <dustymabe> jlebon, right - search would help
17:19:57 <travier> I'd argue that the last tutorial about system user units could be converted into a standalone page or merged into a new system page
17:20:03 <bgilbert> +1 to minimizing FAQ size
17:20:07 <dustymabe> travier: the answer to the question in the FAQ would just be See [docs](https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora-coreos/storage/#NFSMounting)
17:20:32 <PanGoat> travier: I actually wrote it to be short and sweet, but put it in the wrong place because I didn't realize each one was strung together into a thread.
17:20:34 <travier> dustymabe: sure, but does that help?
17:20:48 <jlebon> we should ask the docs folks if there's a way to add a built-in search tool
17:20:48 <dustymabe> I think so, when you're clicking around and can't find what you're looking for
17:21:09 <PanGoat> I'm happy to move the user units to a separate page.
17:21:17 <dustymabe> go to FAQ - Ctrl-F - search NFS - Find FAW entry with link
17:21:17 <travier> PanGoat: no worries, I updated it to make it look like the other but now that we also have an NFS example, maybe we simply need a system (system and user) page for examples
17:21:20 <dustymabe> FAQ*
17:21:26 <bgilbert> dustymabe: IMO it'd be better to fix the underlying problem
17:21:29 <PanGoat> travier: right, right
17:21:44 <travier> systemd* page
17:21:45 <dustymabe> bgilbert: probably - I don't have any solutions there though :)
17:22:18 <PanGoat> yeah, systemd page would be good and maybe reference from the storage page
17:22:38 <travier> I would prefer the FAQ to focus on history/general issues/specific FCOS choices and keep all examples in docs pages
17:22:44 <jlebon> as a user, i would look in the storage place for NFS
17:22:56 <travier> jlebon: good point
17:23:30 <PanGoat> search + metadata. If only.
17:24:02 <travier> a site:https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora-coreos/ xyz google search helps
17:24:24 <jlebon> so let's just put it there for now and dig into the discoverability issue separately?
17:24:34 <PanGoat> good plan
17:25:07 <jlebon> PanGoat: would you be able to to create a new ticket about the latter?
17:25:18 <PanGoat> yep
17:25:32 <jlebon> awesome, thanks!
17:25:53 <jlebon> #action PanGoat to file an issue about FCOS docs discoverability
17:26:10 <jlebon> anything else?
17:26:23 <bgilbert> we're renaming FCCT to Butane
17:26:40 <jlebon> bgilbert: +1
17:26:42 <travier> 🎉
17:26:48 <jbrooks> nice
17:26:57 <bgilbert> "FCCT" is unwieldy and the tool applies to more than just Fedora CoreOS
17:27:10 <bgilbert> the configs will now be "Butane configs"
17:27:25 <bgilbert> the change should be backward-compatible, aside from the command name
17:27:27 <jlebon> re. extension, do we actually want to recommend a custom one vs just .yaml ?
17:27:37 <bgilbert> jlebon: was going to use .bu, yeah
17:27:49 <jlebon> it matters  for editors and website highlighters
17:28:00 <PanGoat> "Hey, do you have the latest version of C4H10 installed?"
17:28:10 <jlebon> (bgilbert: to be clear, i'm arguing for not recommending a custom one)
17:28:13 <dustymabe> 😄
17:28:15 <bgilbert> PanGoat: saves one character :-P
17:28:26 <PanGoat> :)
17:28:48 <dustymabe> yeah, I almost wonder if our ignition examples should use .json
17:28:53 <bgilbert> jlebon: the config doesn't actually say it's a Butane config, so unless you know to recognize variant/version from context
17:29:06 <bgilbert> it's not obvious that some random YAML is a Butane config
17:29:07 <dustymabe> example.bu.yaml
17:29:14 <dustymabe> example.ign.json
17:29:16 <bgilbert> I'm in favor of things saying what they are?
17:29:32 <copperi_> bgilbert: +1
17:29:48 <PanGoat> good point
17:30:15 <bgilbert> jlebon: thoughts?
17:31:06 <jlebon> bgilbert: meh, not strongly opposed i guess.  it's slightly more friction for the editor experience
17:31:17 <bgilbert> it's true
17:31:19 <travier> I have mixed feelings. We will have to get our extensions added everywhere but this is mostly a bu=yaml and ign=json change
17:31:27 <jlebon> it's something i've thought about multiple times for ignition too when hacking locally
17:31:42 <jlebon> dustymabe's .bu.yaml and .ign.json is a nice compromise
17:32:10 <dustymabe> right, users can do whatever they want. but we could change our examples to match ^^
17:33:05 <bgilbert> I'm okayish with the double extension
17:33:21 <bgilbert> it's not a code change in any event.  jlebon, maybe want to file a ticket for discussion?
17:33:48 <jlebon> ack sure
17:33:52 <dustymabe> 👍
17:33:58 <dustymabe> while we're bikeshedding
17:34:18 <jlebon> dustymabe: better be quick, we're over time :)
17:34:19 <dustymabe> I'm sure .but (vs .bu) was considered and discarded for probably obvious reasons?
17:34:25 <travier> it's a change to get into other projects but a rather simple one. Doing editorconfig and some big others should be enough
17:34:29 <dustymabe> I do like the 3 letters and the symetry with .ign, though
17:34:40 <dustymabe> at least it's not .butt
17:34:45 <travier> :D
17:34:50 <bgilbert> dustymabe: in my head, yes.  I didn't bother writing that process into a ticket :-)
17:35:35 <dustymabe> EOM
17:35:54 <bgilbert> and PanGoat, I did actually consider c4h10 O:-)
17:36:34 <PanGoat> ha
17:36:43 <jlebon> heh, that'd be painful to type
17:36:55 <jlebon> ok, going to close this meeting in 45s unless there's anything else
17:37:00 <bgilbert> +1
17:37:19 <PanGoat> thanks jlebon, thanks everyone
17:37:40 <jlebon> #endmeeting