15:01:20 #startmeeting Fedora Base Design Working Group (2014-09-26) 15:01:20 Meeting started Fri Sep 26 15:01:20 2014 UTC. The chair is pknirsch. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:01:20 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 15:01:28 #meetingname Fedora Base Design Working Group 15:01:28 The meeting name has been set to 'fedora_base_design_working_group' 15:01:34 heya everyone! 15:02:08 #chair vpavlin dgilmore jreznik msekleta 15:02:09 Current chairs: dgilmore jreznik msekleta pknirsch vpavlin 15:02:36 Hi everyone! 15:02:41 #chair masta 15:02:41 Current chairs: dgilmore jreznik masta msekleta pknirsch vpavlin 15:02:55 Oh, you're already back msekleta ? 15:02:57 :) 15:03:30 pknirsch, I didn't feel like going somewhere today, never went actually 15:03:46 oh :) 15:03:54 well, rvokal was sick too i heard 15:04:04 Ah well. 15:04:53 Hi all 15:04:57 heya vpavlin ! 15:05:06 * vpavlin is sick too, btw:D 15:05:11 :( 15:05:14 so many sick people! 15:05:25 get well vpavlin :) 15:05:28 Yeah, world is broken:) 15:05:31 jup 15:05:37 probably airplane sickness ;) 15:05:43 but lets get started 15:06:01 #topic Introduction David Sommerseth, taking over buildrequires cleanup work from Benedikt 15:06:25 Hi all! 15:06:28 So first topic i had for today is introduce David to you guys 15:06:34 heya ;) 15:06:38 Welcome onboard dazo:) 15:06:41 o/ 15:07:03 He's part of my team and has volunteered to take over the work that Benedikt started over the past months. 15:07:04 dazo, welcome to the party :) 15:07:09 So thanks dazo ! 15:07:13 :) 15:07:24 I don't have too much to say :) But I'm looking fwd to all the challenges :) 15:07:30 yea :) 15:08:03 * masta looks in 15:08:06 hiya guys 15:08:08 hey masta :) 15:08:27 * jreznik is here 15:08:42 Have you had a chance yet to look into the work that Benedikt did, dazo ? 15:08:51 hey jreznik 15:08:52 great, welcome! 15:09:37 I've been playing with it, and sharkcz proposed to put it into rpmdevtools, which makes sense ... so I'll be testing it out, see if it does what it should and I'll do my best to get it easily available :) 15:10:18 I guess we want to run this on some core packages at some point ... so I need to look at automating that too 15:10:21 thats a nice idea, to have it part of rpmdevtools. that would also make it easier to do automated tests with it. 15:10:24 * pknirsch nods 15:10:48 maybe working with the taskotron guys in Fedora might be an option? 15:11:01 +1 for taskotron integration! 15:11:06 I dunno what taskotron is right now ... but I'll dig into that! 15:11:23 great :) 15:11:28 * dazo receives taskotron pointers gladly :) 15:12:03 http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Taskotron ;) 15:12:17 thx! 15:12:27 it's progressing, tflink is probably the best person to get into contact with 15:13:06 thx! Noted! 15:13:19 thanks jreznik, thats a good pointer as well. 15:13:46 Alright, probably not much more to report on that topic, or do you have anything else yet dazo ? 15:14:09 no, I've just gotten familiar with a lot of stuff, so nothing more right now 15:14:29 Ok, then lets move to the next topic 15:14:52 #topic Discussion: Sharing alpha base image on Docker Hub 15:15:43 nirik had a good point about bash update 15:15:45 Thats probably vpavlin and jreznik's topic, so anything there we need to discuss ? 15:16:53 I needed to login to VPN so if there was something posted since new topic, could you please repost? 15:17:11 [17:15] nirik had a good point about bash update 15:17:13 [17:15] Thats probably vpavlin and jreznik's topic, so anything there we need to discuss ? 15:17:49 for you vpavlin :) 15:17:58 Or any plans on how we can achieve that yet? 15:17:59 thx 15:18:53 This is big topic everywhere - how to track image content and rebuild when needed.. 15:18:54 one thing is sharing on docker hub, second is how to deal with image updates 15:19:06 and true jreznik, nirik had a really good point :) 15:19:28 Nobody has a solution yet - Openshift is looking into this for layered images 15:19:29 for second, there's change filled for f21 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/%28A%29Periodic_Updates_to_Cloud_Images 15:19:57 yeah, really we need a process for this... ie, 'how do we decide to respin' what do we spin, etc. 15:20:37 comment from mattdm https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1091299#c2 15:20:50 I'd say it should be every package update for base image - as base should be minimal 15:21:00 aka we have some of the important prerequisites are in good shape but no policies/commitment 15:21:42 mattdm: you around? ^^^ 15:22:05 what huh hi? 15:22:26 vpavlin even just bugfix updates? 15:23:40 Ah..right, sorry.. 15:24:31 No, immediate update should be caused probably only by security updates 15:24:58 And image should be respinned regularly.. 15:25:15 so it pretty much fits the description in the change 15:25:22 jreznik: yes 15:26:04 now, where to start with setting policies and getting commitment - I'd say it would be quite a burden mostly on releng and qa 15:26:34 for qa, we are not good in cloud testing even for standard releases/milestones :( 15:27:33 I'd say for qa it only means to try if we are able to spawn a container and install software 15:27:45 * msekleta nods 15:28:03 Other things will come later - systemd starts services, shutdown doesn't fail... 15:28:34 vpavlin: well, the change is for all cloud images, not only docker 15:28:47 as for base image, just trying boot (for some definition of boot) the image and installing software should be sufficient 15:29:53 jreznik: Yes, I understand that. But as I don't know much about cloud images, I can comment only Docker 15:30:40 this is current cloud test matrix - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_21_Alpha_RC1_Cloud 15:31:14 ok 15:32:06 I'm just worried, prio for this is always raised only when we have some real security issue and then it goes back to the second/third track 15:32:15 we need more critical CVEs! 15:33:59 * jreznik is going to start nagging folks for change updates early next week, so I'd add this one to the queue of "we want it" :) 15:34:36 but back to the original topic - share to docker hub, vpavlin, your thoughts? 15:34:48 I don't know much about these docker images ... but what kind of format are they distributed in? binary file system? tarball with files? 15:35:01 jreznik: keep me informed about this, please:) 15:35:16 dazo: Tarball with metadata 15:36:01 vpavlin: sure 15:36:02 jreznik: I am not exactly sure how Docker Hub's official images work:/ 15:36:39 But I've CC'ed Lokesh who has dealt with it before 15:37:01 But I'd be definitely for sharing as much and as soon as we can 15:37:09 okay, so then it should be possible to have some mechanism similar to what we have in deltarpm? which has a delta for each file installed in the image, and would only automatically update unmodified files and ask regarding the rest (or something semi-automatic) 15:37:46 but of course the docker hub needs to support this as well, though 15:37:59 dazo: I am not following - what are you trying to solve? 15:38:18 I though it was about shipping updates to installed docker images 15:39:07 No, we are talking about base image - which is the first one in tree and should cause rebuild of all other images built on top of it 15:39:45 ah, right ... sorry! 15:39:54 Otherwise updates of general Docker images are solved by layering and you only download new layres when updating images you use 15:40:07 ic 15:41:22 I need Lokesh's answer, because he still maintaines "official" Fedora images: https://github.com/docker-library/official-images/blob/master/library/fedora 15:41:30 He did changes 2 days ago 15:42:21 I don't know much about docker hub as well but it looks like it has API. I think we would like to leverage that for pushing rebuild base image automatically. 15:42:29 #link https://docs.docker.com/reference/api/docker-io_api/ 15:42:53 msekleta: Not really - official images (like ubuntu) has to be built in stackbrew 15:43:03 https://github.com/docker-library/official-images 15:43:21 If I am not mistaken 15:43:55 I just wanted us to agree here if we want to push the alpha image out or not - I'll gladly take care of the rest 15:44:20 Is that image with the new bash or not? :) 15:44:30 Which one? 15:44:37 The alpha image? 15:44:40 jup 15:44:58 I am not sure what dgilmore has, but it should be easy to rebuild 15:45:37 I'd personally vote for rebuilding it first tbh, but getting the image out i'm definitely in favor of. 15:45:43 And I definitely don't want to push image with broken bash 15:45:48 jup 15:46:35 I need to go in a minute - can we vote or something?:) 15:46:47 lets yes: 15:46:52 Or should we figure out some policies first? 15:47:01 hm 15:47:43 My opinion is to push asap:) 15:47:47 vpavlin, so our alpha image will be semi-official then ? if don't build it in stackbrew. 15:48:29 msekleta: No, I think we could consider it official 15:48:50 from Docker's POV? 15:48:59 msekleta: I need to figure out details 15:49:09 vpavlin, ok 15:51:51 Ok, so what if I figure out what staps need to be taken and we will vote either during the week on ML or next friday on the meeting? 15:51:59 *steps 15:52:04 Sounds reasonable, yes. 15:52:16 +1 on voting on ML next week with more info ;) 15:52:38 * pknirsch votes for voting :) 15:53:06 * vpavlin has to go and is happy about pknirsch's vote for voting 15:53:14 :) 15:54:19 #info vpavlin to figure out what staps need to be taken and we will vote either during the week on ML or next friday on the meeting on Docker image procedures and push 15:54:20 well, I'd trust vpavlin and co they know what they do with the image and I'm not sure we have to vote 15:54:51 just it should be really official image (re-reading status above for the second time) 15:54:51 jreznik: we can do that via ML next week where vpavlin can just give a quick update and we'll agree :) 15:55:19 at which point we can the officially release/push the image 15:55:30 with announcement etc yadda 15:57:15 aright, let move to open floor now, think we've exhausted the topic for today ;) 15:57:19 #topic Open Floor 15:57:26 anyone got anything else for today? 15:57:34 * jreznik has one topic 15:58:38 I'm not sure if you saw this ticket https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1346 - about FPC... I did not want to go out with my proposal so early before talking to you guys but the ticket was opened and so I took it as opportunity to react 15:58:54 * pknirsch takes a look 15:58:56 ah 15:58:56 and Base is pretty much main part of the proposal 15:59:00 the FPC not working one 16:00:02 so pls take a look/comment, we can talk about it later, FPC should be dragged into too (it wasn't my intention it went opposite way, but you know, once ticket exists, it could be fast ;-) 16:00:13 well, i'd be uneasy about licensing in Base to be honest 16:00:19 but the rest makes a lot of sense 16:00:37 pknirsch: licensing is one thing I'm not sure about to be honest 16:00:42 ya 16:00:53 I am not a lawyer(tm) ;) 16:01:01 and I'd say it was always out of FPC scope even 16:01:09 right 16:01:29 thats why i'd leave the licensing part out of the scope there 16:02:41 I really believe base should be responsible for base packaging, same desktop for desktop etc. and I know there could be conflict of interest but it could be everywhere when you have small team as Fedora still is 16:03:23 and I think it fits with what stickter said there - with Fedora.Next - Base is going to be that strict part and other rings/wg would have looser policies 16:03:34 so it fits together 16:03:35 ae 16:03:37 aye 16:03:49 and new products could have different / more relaxed guidelines 16:03:56 or subsets of what Base is requiring 16:04:08 yep 16:04:13 and licensing would still be outside of that 16:04:42 * msekleta agree with pknirsch 16:05:02 someone would have to take responsibility of it... and same as with WGs/products, there are some overlapping parts 16:05:43 same as WGs can't be experts in everything but with help of SIGs... same could apply for licensing - with help from legal 16:06:02 * dazo need to leave now 16:06:15 cya dazo 16:06:32 * jreznik should leave too :) 16:06:47 :) 16:06:50 Ugh! 16:06:53 so late already 16:06:54 so think about it, I'd like to have Base WG support as the most of the work is going to end on our shoulders 16:06:57 hot damn 16:07:08 rght 16:07:41 and maybe having one or two members of the FPC on base might be a good idea then, too? 16:08:20 still not sure about licensing, but with help of legal people we maybe able to pull it off 16:08:28 pknirsch: indeed 16:09:09 could you comment it in the ticket that fpc members would be more than welcome in Base? 16:10:05 yes, I can mention that 16:10:35 cool, thanks! 16:11:19 it was for pknirsch as he's our boss but I really don't care who will do it, it's invitation :) 16:11:43 pff, anyone can invite people :) 16:13:03 I said that :) 16:13:12 jreznik, ok then 16:13:26 pknirsch, can you comment in the ticket please 16:13:33 :) 16:13:47 yea, though id.fp.org doesn't like me apparently :/ 16:13:59 * pknirsch tries and makes a note to do it on Monday 16:14:13 id.fp.org doesn't work for me also 16:14:24 getting 500 16:14:33 jup 16:14:37 Monday it is then :) 16:15:52 msekleta: fails for me too 16:16:27 -> #fedora-admin report 16:18:48 msekleta: nirik restarted httpd, it's working again 16:20:22 thanks jreznik 16:20:34 and ofc nirik :) 16:20:54 happy to help 16:25:11 ok guys, I have to leave now - see you next week 16:25:19 alright, thanks, same here 16:25:25 just finishing the comment in the ticket 16:25:30 thanks 16:25:57 bye jreznik 16:26:09 bye bye all! 16:30:44 #endmeeting