13:00:34 <mmaslano> #startmeeting Env and Stacks (2014-09-02)
13:00:34 <zodbot> Meeting started Tue Sep  2 13:00:34 2014 UTC.  The chair is mmaslano. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
13:00:34 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
13:00:41 <mmaslano> #meetingname env-and-stacks
13:00:41 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'env-and-stacks'
13:00:48 <mmaslano> #chair pkovar tjanez samkottler bkabrda hhorak juhp mmaslano vpavlin sicampbell
13:00:48 <zodbot> Current chairs: bkabrda hhorak juhp mmaslano pkovar samkottler sicampbell tjanez vpavlin
13:00:59 <juhp_> hi
13:01:05 <hhorak> Hi
13:01:19 <vpavlin> Hey
13:02:30 * tflink is lurking
13:02:40 <mmaslano> #topic init process
13:03:27 <mmaslano> #topic how hhorak's idea about summary from each WG worked
13:03:44 <mmaslano> hhorak: I read the whole conversation. So, cross posting didn't work
13:04:00 <hhorak> yeah, it did not work very much :)
13:04:37 <juhp_> hm
13:04:41 <hhorak> It seems like we haven't moved anywhere except we should try to utilize irc commands during meeting more..
13:04:59 <mmaslano> yes. And put those notes as blogpost on planet
13:05:38 <juhp_> how did the conversation go? :)   (sorry I didn't read any of it)
13:06:44 <hhorak> juhp_: long story short, cross posting a short summary to all groups is not a good idea, but using more #info and stuff during meeting could make the meeting logs more readable
13:07:08 <juhp_> okay, fair enough I suppose
13:07:41 <mmaslano> hhorak: do you agree or would you like to do more about it?
13:07:43 <juhp_> maybe there should be a fedora-wg-list?
13:08:13 <juhp_> but maybe minutes are the limit for now anyway :)
13:08:27 <hhorak> juhp_: well, I will try to come up with new ideas, but do not have anything particular on my mind right now.. I'd definitly like to make it a bit differently, than we do it now (everybody needs to look at more resources right now)
13:08:28 <vpavlin> juhp_: not another list please:)
13:08:32 <juhp_> haha
13:08:59 <juhp_> hhorak, okay
13:09:25 * langdon lurking as well
13:10:41 <mmaslano> #info  cross posting a short summary to all groups is not a good idea, but using more #info and stuff during meeting could make the meeting logs more readable
13:10:42 <hhorak> A good thing is that there was quite a consensus that somebody from a group should take some time (minutes, not hours) to convert either meeting minutes or ML discussions and publish it.. The only missing part is how this info bring to all WGs members efficiently..
13:11:13 <mmaslano> subscribe the blog :)
13:11:24 <mmaslano> imho problem is to find a person who would write those minutes
13:11:27 <hhorak> (by convert I meant summarize)
13:11:33 <mmaslano> yeah
13:11:44 <juhp_> right
13:11:51 <mmaslano> ok, I can start with it today
13:12:03 <smooge> my apologies for my delay
13:12:06 <bkabrda> hi everyone, sorry I'm late; I was coding so hard I didn't notice what time it was :)
13:12:13 <hhorak> mmaslano: great, thanks!
13:12:41 <juhp_> smooge, thanks for joining - we didn't get to epel/epic yet :)
13:12:45 <mmaslano> #info mmaslano will process meeting minutes on her blog (shared on fedora.planet)
13:13:53 <juhp_> personally I would prefer to read something on devel list but that is just my 2c :)
13:14:12 <mmaslano> there are already meeting minutes.
13:14:15 <juhp_> yes
13:15:54 <mmaslano> hhorak: I guess we won't persuade other WGs to do it too
13:16:18 <hhorak> mmaslano: we could at least ask :)
13:16:29 <mmaslano> hhorak: do you want it as action item?
13:16:44 <juhp_> I guess the problem is the meeting minutes are too terse and the logs too long to trawl through... so guess there is consensus around that :)
13:18:41 <hhorak> mmaslano: I'll make a bit more general AI :)
13:18:41 <hhorak> #action hhorak will keep trying to get summary of working groups' discussion (ML, meetings) to other groups' members
13:19:04 <vpavlin> What about having one person on meeting dedicated to create meeting minutes (using irc bot commands os course)?
13:19:22 <mmaslano> vpavlin: that's me here :)
13:19:36 <vpavlin> Hmm..true:)
13:19:37 <mmaslano> problem is people don't put all information into info and action :)
13:19:44 <mmaslano> people and me too
13:19:50 <mmaslano> move on to epic?
13:19:51 <juhp_> right
13:19:52 <sicampbell> apologies for being late
13:20:02 <hhorak> vpavlin: still that would cover only meetings, not all interesting info is mentioned on meetings. (but let's move forward)
13:20:09 <mmaslano> still on time for epic/epel
13:20:17 <mmaslano> #topic epel/epic proposal - chat with smoodge
13:20:21 <juhp_> but maybe having a secretary (rotating) is a good idea
13:20:31 <mmaslano> smooge: argh I didn't get the nick right
13:20:56 <mmaslano> juhp_: it is especially I found out it's already Tuesday and I don't have agenda
13:21:06 <juhp_> hehe
13:21:16 <vpavlin> hhorak: right, sorry, I am talking to several other people atm, so not really focused...:)
13:21:22 <mmaslano> juhp_: smooge: did you speak? thanks for mail about the proposal
13:21:43 <juhp_> I had some communication about epic/epel
13:21:51 <mmaslano> smooge: If I understand correctly EPEL will have three repos.
13:22:10 <smooge> we are still working that out
13:22:11 <juhp_> though I think the epel group didn't discuss it much on Friday from my reading of the log at least
13:22:46 <juhp_> s/I had/we had/
13:22:51 <smooge> we are going to be discussing it this week in email as various peoples schedules were a bit broken last week
13:23:00 <juhp_> cool
13:23:50 <mmaslano> smooge: sounds as good thing for me if I think about Python3...
13:23:58 <smooge> our first steps will be policy discussions then technical discussions.
13:24:03 <mmaslano> sure
13:24:16 <bkabrda> I just wanted to say that :) although it very much relies on the policies
13:24:40 <mmaslano> but we know about some packages, which don't fit well into EPEL
13:25:01 <smooge> well a lot of packages don't :). RHEL keeps getting longer lived :)
13:25:15 <juhp_> so as I understand the current suggestion is to have the stable epel repo, a new epel-rolling(?) repo (more relaxed than current epel policy), and a epel-fast repo (closer to latest upstream) releases or something along those lines
13:26:06 <smooge> yes that is what is currently out there
13:26:52 <bkabrda> smooge: is there some kind of draft that one can read through?
13:26:53 <smooge> the epel-fast and epel-rolling might be combined into one repo depending on how releng sees the amount of work needed to do each one
13:27:07 <juhp_> which would be a good improvement over the single repo
13:27:14 <smooge> bkabrda, nothing beyond what juhp just said
13:27:16 <juhp_> okay - yes I could see that happening
13:27:51 <smooge> bkabrda, we are wanting to clarify existing procedures and issues first
13:27:58 <bkabrda> smooge: ok. I just want to keep an eye on this, since depending on the policies, this may or may not be *the* place to put python3 for epel
13:28:21 <smooge> I understand.
13:28:44 <juhp_> smooge, certainly agreed good to take the discussion slowly and consider options carefully
13:29:11 <mmaslano> smooge: ok, we will follow up the meeting minutes
13:29:18 <mmaslano> smooge: do you need anything from us?
13:29:43 <juhp_> I still feel over 7 years though the gap between epel and epel-rolling can get too large for some packages
13:29:49 <smooge> At our present speed and people needing to work on Fedora 20 I expect we will be shooting after the release for the extra repos
13:30:17 <smooge> so I would suggest that people follow the discussion on epel-devel
13:30:22 <juhp_> sure
13:30:34 <smooge> and feed back issues they see with proposals and such
13:30:56 <juhp_> okay
13:31:05 <smooge> and wish us luck :)
13:31:07 <bkabrda> smooge: thanks, I'll join that list and that discussion
13:31:46 <juhp_> and will try to keep on eye on the discussions too and contribute input
13:32:01 <hhorak> smooge: one question more -- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL-faster-repo-ideas speaks about different position about overlapping packages, how come it could be combined at some point? (or is this page not up2date?)
13:32:20 <mmaslano> smooge: good luck
13:32:29 <mmaslano> #url https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL-faster-repo-ideas
13:32:50 <smooge> hhorak, could you explain what you you see as an issue? [Its way early and my brain is not as fast as it should be.]
13:33:22 <mmaslano> #info faster EPEL is only proposal now. Members of Env and Stack should follow epel-devel for discussion about the proposal.
13:34:22 <hhorak> smooge: I meant repos epel-rolling and epel-edge -- overlaps allowed only in edge; supposing this should be the same as fast and as you have mentioned the repos could be combined into one repo, it does not make sense to me
13:34:53 <juhp_> hhorak, maybe it means overlaps of epel-fast with rhel
13:35:14 <hhorak> smooge: but I might overthink it in this early phase and will be totally fine with "this will be sorted out" answer
13:36:08 <juhp_> yes I think things are still pretty much up in the air :)
13:36:51 <smooge> hhorak that is a 'anything goes proposal' stage at the moment..
13:37:19 <smooge> so one proposal is that they would allow overlaps but it hasn't been discussed that we would allow that at all.
13:38:11 <juhp_> hhorak, erm nm - yes to be decided I guess
13:39:10 <smooge> we are at the throw stuff at the wall stage and that page is meant to be a collection of all the various ideas. We will be going through various parts to get them cleared up.
13:39:18 <juhp_> :)
13:39:30 <hhorak> smooge: ok, all right.
13:40:21 <hhorak> One thing I'd like to see stated on the page above though -- what problem are we trying to solve? I guess I know the answer, but somebody with no background could be wondering what is the proposal going to solve actually.
13:42:08 <smooge> hhorak, ok thanks I will add that to the discussion to make sure we have a consensus on that
13:42:24 <bkabrda> hhorak: current epel policies basically don't allow rebasing with major changes (e.g. if we put python 3.4 in there, we'd have to maintain in for the rest of days of epel 7 repo)
13:42:35 <hhorak> smooge: thanks a lot
13:42:45 <bkabrda> at least that's my painpoint :)
13:42:47 <juhp_> true - I think one of the major things is currently some package updates break epel's official stability policy, due to epel long life
13:43:08 <juhp_> hhorak, ^
13:43:09 <smooge> bkabrda, well actually no. we would just have a 'this is no longer supported upstream and we are removing it from the repo'
13:43:53 <smooge> it has been done for various packages in the past.. but it leaves people wanting the old stuff still and the new stuff possibly breaking the new
13:44:05 <juhp_> smooge, exactly
13:44:26 <juhp_> right so we should make both or more available
13:44:30 <smooge> so we try to avoid it as much as possible.. which makes your life harder because people issues :)
13:46:31 <smooge> anyway I will add that to the page shortly
13:46:57 <bkabrda> smooge: ok, thanks
13:49:52 <mmaslano> next topic?
13:50:48 <juhp_> smooge, thanks so much for joining the meeting - I know it is early for you
13:51:09 <mmaslano> smooge: thanks!
13:51:21 <juhp_> it has helped to clarify my thinking on this too
13:51:38 <mmaslano> sicampbell: didn't you have some action item from previous meetings?
13:52:00 <sicampbell> Yes - it was to update the wiki and it's done
13:52:30 <mmaslano> ah, thanks
13:52:41 <mmaslano> #topic openfloor
13:52:58 <mmaslano> if you want to speak about rotating chairman, that would be good
13:53:46 <vpavlin> mmaslano: What does "rotating chairman" mean?
13:54:10 <mmaslano> vpavlin: it means I'm not doing agenda and meeting minutes every week :)
13:54:31 <mmaslano> fesco is picking new chairman every week on the end of meeting
13:54:38 <hhorak> mmaslano: +1 for that idea (chairman + secretary)
13:54:40 <mmaslano> but it depends if you are willing to do it
13:55:12 <juhp_> I think it is a good idea
13:55:43 <vpavlin> I'd like to just say that I talked to Matěj Stuchlík about Fedora Docker build service. bkabrda you ok with him working on that?
13:55:43 <vpavlin> I pointed him to Pulp/Crane and quay.io which is very nic implementation of Docker registry and a lot more stuff.
13:56:09 <vpavlin> mmaslano: +1
13:57:15 <sicampbell> Is this for building the base containers ?
13:57:44 <vpavlin> sicampbell: No, base images will be (are) built in Koji
13:57:58 <mmaslano> I'll take it as consensus. Who will do chairman next?
13:58:15 <vpavlin> This should be for Fedora users to build and host their layered images
13:58:42 <mmaslano> #info chairman for next meeting will be picked at end of the current meeting
13:59:12 <hhorak> I can be the chairman the next week.
13:59:14 <juhp_> mmaslano, shall we have a rotating secretary too?
13:59:34 <mmaslano> it's usually one person
13:59:42 <hhorak> it would make sense to me that charmain would do the secretary work as well...
13:59:48 <juhp_> okay
13:59:54 <mmaslano> #action hhorak will be chairman and secretary next week
13:59:57 <mmaslano> hhorak: thanks
14:00:34 <mmaslano> bkabrda: could you verify if it's okay to bother Matej about Fedora Docker?
14:00:46 <hhorak> mmaslano: thanks to you for being chair(wo)man today
14:01:20 <bkabrda> mmaslano: I guess it's ok
14:01:31 <langdon> vpavlin: will you be looking at security/findability aspects of the docker infra?
14:02:00 * langdon uses "chairperson" ;)
14:03:02 <vpavlin> langdon: I will have to look at it. I still think we should set up registry with the build service and store the results there - the same way quay work
14:03:11 <mmaslano> #action mstuchli will work on Fedora Docker build service
14:03:35 <vpavlin> langdon: We can then let have some switch which will mark the build stable enough to be pushed to hub.docker.io
14:04:10 <langdon> vpavlin: how about a write up? :) that way i (may) understand ;)
14:04:25 <vpavlin> Pulp guys are already looking at doing automtic build with help of Jenkins
14:04:52 <vpavlin> langdon: I've sent it to you (I hope)
14:06:08 * langdon digs through email
14:07:53 <vpavlin> langdon: 2014-8-26 Fedora Docker Build service and Registry
14:07:56 * langdon found it, will reply
14:09:46 <vpavlin> Thanks;)
14:13:03 <vpavlin> That's probably all from me...
14:13:39 <vpavlin> #info We need to figure out whether we want private Docker registry or not
14:15:47 <mmaslano> openfloor or end?
14:16:29 <juhp_> can we end? :)
14:17:14 <mmaslano> thanks guys
14:17:17 <mmaslano> #endmeeting