14:00:17 <nils> #startmeeting modularity_wg
14:00:17 <zodbot> Meeting started Tue Sep  4 14:00:17 2018 UTC.
14:00:17 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
14:00:17 <zodbot> The chair is nils. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
14:00:17 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
14:00:17 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'modularity_wg'
14:00:18 <nils> #meetingtopic Weekly Meeting of the Modularity Working Group
14:00:18 <nils> #chair dgilmore_ langdon mikedep333
14:00:18 <zodbot> Current chairs: dgilmore_ langdon mikedep333 nils
14:00:29 <contyk> hey
14:00:31 <nils> #topic Roll Call
14:00:35 <contyk> .hello psabata
14:00:36 <zodbot> contyk: psabata 'Petr Šabata' <psabata@redhat.com>
14:00:36 <nils> .hello nphilipp
14:00:38 <langdon> .hello2
14:00:39 <zodbot> nils: nphilipp 'Nils Philippsen' <nphilipp@redhat.com>
14:00:42 <zodbot> langdon: langdon 'Langdon White' <langdon@redhat.com>
14:01:37 <nils> #topic Agenda
14:02:20 <langdon> we have agenda in the issue list!
14:02:28 <nils> We actually do have two issues tagged for the meeting, but they're both by asamalik who's out today IIRC.
14:02:34 <langdon> ha
14:02:34 <nils> :D
14:02:46 <nils> So, anything besides Adam's topics?
14:02:52 <contyk> what are those?
14:03:01 <nils> - Replacing docs.pagure.org/modularity with a redirect to the Fedora Docs / Modularity
14:03:08 <nils> - Managing module lifecycles
14:03:08 <langdon> we might be able to do the managing lifecycles one
14:03:17 <nils> ok I'll add it
14:03:26 <nils> #info Managing module lifecycles
14:03:56 <nils> anything else that doesn't fit AOB?
14:04:37 <nils> alright
14:04:40 <nils> #info AOB
14:04:49 <nils> #topic Managing module lifecycles
14:04:52 <langdon> where AOB = any other business :)
14:04:54 <nils> langdon?
14:04:58 <nils> exactly :)
14:05:19 <langdon> #link https://pagure.io/modularity/issue/107 meeting agenda item
14:05:29 <nils> I'm usually the last one to decipher acronyms, so didn't think explaining it was necessary ;)
14:05:35 <langdon> #link https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/K4FUOQHQSRAAI3PUUGXAC6CXEN27Y2JH/ mail thread
14:05:47 <contyk> so
14:05:49 <langdon> nils: AOB is pretty unusual in the US (in my experience)
14:05:54 <nils> ah ok
14:06:11 <contyk> Adam started a thread about the lifecycles after the last meeting
14:06:22 <contyk> he also said he would start another, more condensed one, easier to reply to
14:06:37 <contyk> also regarding the other topic, I believe we ageed to do it two weeks ago
14:06:52 <langdon> contyk: which other topic?
14:06:59 <contyk> the redirect
14:07:07 <langdon> oh
14:07:18 <langdon> we can sitll put it on the agenda after this?
14:07:28 <langdon> i would like to read that page.. but probably can do it in parallel
14:08:10 <nils> langdon, we can discuss it but the bot won't list it in the overview
14:08:15 <nils> AIUI
14:08:20 <langdon> ahhh
14:08:44 <nils> (because the overview is just what we put as #infos in the Agenda topic)
14:09:19 <langdon> i may just make some comments in the ticket
14:09:25 <langdon> but.. module lifecycles?
14:09:33 <langdon> do we have comments here?
14:10:17 <nils> option #2 sounds a lot like the policy we have for bare packages
14:10:31 <nils> just with the added recorded EOLs as trimming
14:12:11 <langdon> the big problem with that is that it requires a module maintainer to continue to maintain it for at least all current releases
14:12:17 <langdon> is that a high burden?
14:12:50 <nils> only if they forget to retire it from Rawhide in time
14:13:05 <langdon> i would say, i think that, from a user perspective, it would be less confusing..
14:13:26 <langdon> we also don't have to assume that this policy is forever.. just the one we have for now
14:13:33 <nils> it's more implicit than option #1, but looks to be more what people are used to
14:14:09 <nils> One thing I don't like too much about option #1 is that it uses packages' EOLs to compute the one of the module, regardless of if they're API packages or not
14:14:19 <langdon> ahh yes
14:14:27 <langdon> i like the streams.yaml idea
14:14:32 <langdon> contyk: opinions?
14:14:50 * contyk reads
14:15:09 <nils> But that may be doing the right thing as a side effect, i.e. non-API EOL influences module EOL, ... magic happens ..., maintainer knows it's something they need to look at.
14:16:07 <langdon> nils: well.. it could very easily be that non-api-rpm is in the process of being replaced.. that shouldn't effect module eol at all IMO
14:16:41 <contyk> I think what we currently have is more like #2
14:16:56 <contyk> since you can only pick two dates each year
14:17:10 <nils> yeah, it's more a PR problem than a technical one -- if the maintainer wants to support the module until date X, then the module metadata should say that, regardless of some non-API component's shorter EOL
14:17:15 <contyk> I also think people struggle with choosing this one thing; doing so for individual packages would be insane
14:17:37 <nils> I think you have to for stream branches of RPMs, right?
14:19:32 <contyk> possibly
14:19:47 <contyk> hmmm
14:20:02 <contyk> I don't currently have an opinion on this, would need to come up with something on the spot :)
14:20:12 <langdon> ha
14:20:26 <langdon> well.. should we ask asamalik to send the new note.. and table this for now?
14:20:43 <contyk> he's planning to, afaik
14:20:46 <contyk> but sure
14:21:50 <nils> should this be #action'ed?
14:22:00 <langdon> so ... #info needs more discussion, moving back to mailing list && #action asamalik to send out a new, more concise, note about module lifecycles
14:22:19 <nils> sounds good
14:22:37 <langdon> #info needs more discussion, moving back to mailing list
14:22:45 <langdon> #action asamalik to send out a new, more concise, note about module lifecycles
14:23:39 <nils> langdon, do you want to do the redirect thing now?
14:24:26 <langdon> does anyone have comments? i am just going to make some comments in the ticket
14:25:02 <nils> for reference: https://pagure.io/modularity/issue/106
14:25:35 <nils> apparently no comments here
14:25:54 <nils> #topic Open Floor / Any Other Business
14:26:09 <nils> so, anything else?
14:26:31 <langdon> i don't really have anything else
14:26:44 <langdon> working on proposals for f30 & 31
14:27:11 <contyk> me neither
14:27:46 <nils> okie dokie
14:27:55 <nils> thanks everybody!
14:27:57 <nils> #endmeeting