13:01:55 <mattdm> #startmeeting Council (2018-03-14)
13:01:55 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed Mar 14 13:01:55 2018 UTC.  The chair is mattdm. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
13:01:55 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
13:01:55 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'council_(2018-03-14)'
13:01:56 <bexelbie> mattdm, good to hear
13:01:57 <mattdm> #meetingname council
13:01:57 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'council'
13:02:01 <bexelbie> .hello bex
13:02:02 <zodbot> bexelbie: bex 'Brian (bex) Exelbierd' <bex@pobox.com>
13:02:04 <dperpeet> .hello dperpeet
13:02:05 <mattdm> #chair mattdm jkurik jwb langdon robyduck bexelbie dperpeet Amita nb dgilmore pbrobinson
13:02:05 <zodbot> Current chairs: Amita bexelbie dgilmore dperpeet jkurik jwb langdon mattdm nb pbrobinson robyduck
13:02:05 <zodbot> dperpeet: dperpeet 'None' <dperpeet@redhat.com>
13:02:18 <alciregi> .hello
13:02:18 <zodbot> alciregi: (hello <an alias, 1 argument>) -- Alias for "hellomynameis $1".
13:02:23 <Amita> .hello amsharma
13:02:24 <zodbot> Amita: amsharma 'Amita Sharma' <amsharma@redhat.com>
13:02:31 <alciregi> .hello alciregi
13:02:32 <zodbot> alciregi: alciregi 'Alessio Ciregia' <alciregi@gmail.com>
13:02:45 <dgilmore> hey mattdm
13:02:51 <Amita> hello everyone
13:02:52 <jwb> mattdm, 1/3 here.  double duty on a different meeting
13:02:54 <mattdm> #topic Introductions, Welcomes
13:03:29 <mattdm> So, this is our open floor meeting
13:03:39 <mattdm> We totally failed to find a time that works for everyone
13:03:49 <mattdm> so I suggest that as one topic of conversation
13:03:54 <langdon> .hello2
13:03:55 <zodbot> langdon: langdon 'Langdon White' <langdon@redhat.com>
13:04:24 <mattdm> topic #Today's Open Floor Agenda
13:04:44 <mattdm> Other than the meeting time, we'd talked about having a standing open floor topic of checkins from the objective leads
13:04:58 <mattdm> and if robyduck is here an update on mindshare would be nice
13:05:06 <mattdm> or bexelbie can do that otherwise
13:05:38 <mattdm> anyone have anything else?
13:05:56 <bexelbie> or mattdm can do that :P
13:06:21 <bexelbie> we need to move forward with buegeting - but no action during this meeting
13:06:24 <mattdm> yeah but you'll do a better job :)
13:06:32 <bexelbie> I'll be sending email soon I hope - working on last bit of the paperwork catchup
13:06:43 <bexelbie> but you're views are always critical mattdm  :D
13:06:58 <mattdm> I do like to criticize!
13:07:48 <mattdm> okay, so, let's talk about the meeting time
13:08:12 <mattdm> #topic Meeting Time
13:08:22 <mattdm> here's the results code for the latest whenisgood
13:08:29 <mattdm> http://whenisgood.net/fedora-council-2018-take2/results/7peqrra
13:08:45 <mattdm> note that that's the admin link so everyone can edit responses so don't do that :)
13:09:25 <mattdm> The point is that there are *mostly* times when 7 or more of us can't make it
13:10:10 <mattdm> and the best times are ones when still three people can't make it
13:10:21 <bexelbie> mattdm, is that on GMT?
13:10:30 <bexelbie> there is a two person blocked time ...
13:10:32 <mattdm> bexelbie: it is on eastern time
13:10:34 <bexelbie> 3pm Wed
13:10:47 <bexelbie> ick .. /me hates that time but apparently I voted for it :P
13:10:49 <mattdm> yeah, so that's dperpeet and Amita who can't make that one
13:11:07 <Amita> 3PM GMT?
13:11:09 <mattdm> dperpeet and Amita -- is it *possible* to open that up?
13:11:15 <mattdm> Amita: no, sadly, 3PM US/Eastern
13:11:36 <dperpeet> mattdm, I could make it sometimes
13:11:45 <mattdm> We decided to follow US/Eastern because it makes the daylight saving time switch mildy less confusing
13:12:03 <mattdm> dperpeet: sometimes on a predictable basis?
13:12:28 <dperpeet> mattdm, >=50% probably
13:12:32 <bexelbie> mattdm, but you asked us to vote on GMT ...
13:12:43 <mattdm> bexelbie: the voting thing let you set your timezone
13:12:47 <mattdm> the results our in my timezone
13:13:03 <mattdm> that's how when is good works
13:13:05 <mattdm> see http://whenisgood.net/fedora-council-2018-take2
13:13:08 <Amita> so it will be 11:30 PM for me
13:13:08 <mattdm> there's a dropdown
13:13:16 <bexelbie> yes, but I thought we didn't move the meeting for timezone changes is my point
13:13:19 <mattdm> Amita: yeah that is pretty miserable
13:13:31 <mattdm> bexelbie: we move it along with the US timezone change
13:13:35 <dperpeet> mattdm, I could almost always make time when my input is planned via agenda
13:13:37 <mattdm> at least, we had been.
13:13:58 <mattdm> dperpeet: okay, yeah, and I want to plan that for you *anyway*, so okay, cool.
13:14:43 <mattdm> dperpeet: as objective lead, I think we'll *need* you for objective checkin meetings once a month, and want you around for input on other things at least one other time
13:14:57 <dperpeet> that sounds very doable
13:15:02 * bexelbie is going to have to find a better mobile IRC app as I am sure I'll be on a tram during this meeting sometimes :D
13:16:02 <mattdm> Amita: It's inevitable because of this whole "world is round" thing, but your times are all exceedingly early in the morning in the US :(
13:16:30 <Amita> mattdm, ok, np, I can also adjust
13:16:35 <Amita> and will join sometimes
13:16:50 <mattdm> One possibility is to have one meeting a month at an early time
13:16:54 <Amita> and if there is something specific for me, I can join in for sure
13:17:07 * dgilmore notes that he cannot join any earlier than this Monday to Wednesday
13:17:20 <dperpeet> mattdm, no need to do that on my account, shifting times are worse on my schedule than a known bad time :)
13:17:30 <dperpeet> but of course the time is worse for Amita
13:17:47 * dgilmore has to get a kid up, fed, and ready for school those days and is distracted by that
13:18:03 <mattdm> Amita: can you make late at night work once a month?
13:18:20 <Amita> mattdm, I can try for sure more than once
13:18:52 <dgilmore> mattdm: my schedule is currently in a state of flux, I will know what it will look like in about 3-4 weeks
13:19:03 <Amita> and please feel free to update me before if my presence is important for any particular day
13:19:03 <mattdm> okay. cool. let's try that then and see if it's going ok
13:19:23 <mattdm> Amita: yeah. I'll try to be better about advance agendas especially for the tickets meetings
13:19:34 <Amita> mattdm, cool, thanks
13:19:59 <mattdm> #info We're going to aim for 3pm US/Eastern (currently 19:00 GMT) on Wednesdays as a time that most people can make it
13:20:20 <mattdm> I did the GMT math right, right?
13:20:36 <Amita> oh wait
13:20:40 <Amita> that is 12:30 AM IST
13:20:44 <Amita> night
13:20:46 <Amita> WOW
13:20:48 <Amita> :(
13:21:26 <mattdm> Hmmmmmm. Ok, that's even worse.
13:21:51 <Amita> mattdm, is it not possible to do it earlier
13:21:57 <Amita> as it is afternoon for US
13:22:26 <mattdm> Amita: there's a slot 3 hours earlier whcih works for many people too
13:22:41 <mattdm> but robyduck is missing too and he's not here
13:22:45 <Amita> that will be great, if we can choose that one
13:23:06 <Amita> let's ask him over mail, if he agrees
13:23:13 <Amita> where is from?
13:23:15 <mattdm> What if we make one of the open floor meetings at that time, and the rest at the later time?
13:23:20 <mattdm> Amita: he is from Italy
13:23:38 <mattdm> So it is possibly during his commute home from work
13:24:00 <Amita> you want me to drop him a quick mail CC you
13:24:03 <Amita> about it?
13:24:19 <mattdm> Amita: I'll post to the council list. let's try the staggered time and see how it goes
13:24:33 <mattdm> The tickets and ongoing stuff, you can keep up with in the tickets
13:24:53 <mattdm> #info We need to do more work *not just at meeting time* in order for this to work
13:24:54 <Amita> Sure
13:25:20 <mattdm> #info Let's try also having one of the open floor meetings an earlier time to be more inclusive
13:25:32 <mattdm> I am not missign the irony that it's hard to include our inclusion person :-/
13:25:48 <mattdm> okay, so anyway, that took half the meeting. let's move on. :)
13:25:56 <mattdm> #topic CI Objective Update
13:26:05 <mattdm> dperpeet: you still around? :)
13:26:09 <dperpeet> yup
13:26:20 <mattdm> Can you give a brief rundown of how this is going?
13:26:42 <dperpeet> overall the mindset change towards including tests is looking good
13:27:07 <dperpeet> packagers are adding tests and gating in Fedora appears to be accepted
13:27:17 <Amita> great
13:27:21 <dperpeet> testing non-Atomic packages is almost ready
13:27:36 <dperpeet> the pipeline for that is up in a testing environment, but not production ready yet
13:27:54 <dperpeet> this should work in the next two weeks
13:27:58 <mattdm> dperpeet: that's amazing. do we have numbers on this?
13:28:15 <mattdm> I'm looking at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Objectives/Continuous_Integration_and_Delivery_of_Fedora_Atomic_Host#Key_Results
13:28:25 <mattdm> It says "100 packages in Fedora Atomic host have at least one test stored in dist-git according to the spec."
13:28:33 <mattdm> I'd be curious to know what percent we are at :)
13:28:46 <mattdm> #info packagers are adding tests and gating in Fedora appears to be accepted
13:28:59 <mattdm> #info testing non-Atomic packages is almost ready -- should work in next two weeks
13:29:04 <dperpeet> well, our statistics page seems to be broken right now :)
13:29:09 <dperpeet> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/CI/Tests/stat
13:29:18 <mattdm> oops :)
13:29:52 * bexelbie wonders if we need a test to gate the statistics
13:29:52 <mattdm> if it *were* working, what would it say?
13:29:55 * bexelbie ducks
13:30:07 <dperpeet> bexelbie, working on it :)
13:30:16 <dperpeet> I think the numbers were between 20 and 30%
13:30:22 <dperpeet> for Atomic Host packages
13:30:39 <mattdm> ok, so not *quite* a hundred yet :)
13:30:43 <dperpeet> yeah
13:30:51 * langdon got very distracted.. apologies.. reading scrollback
13:30:57 <dperpeet> and we're working on the compose-level tests also
13:30:59 <dperpeet> right now
13:31:11 <mattdm> Do you think that is likely to ramp up quickly? Do we need to do a publicity campaign or something?
13:31:12 <dperpeet> so the ones that come ones the packages have been put together
13:31:36 <dperpeet> #link https://fedoramagazine.org/continuous-integration-fedora/
13:31:45 <dperpeet> we've published an article on the tests very recently
13:32:04 <dperpeet> and updated the wiki
13:32:08 <dperpeet> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/CI
13:32:11 <dgilmore> dperpeet: in your up in two weeks are you accounting for the fact that infrastructure is frozen until Beta is released?
13:32:17 <mattdm> dperpeet: okay, cool.
13:32:21 <dperpeet> moving some of this into fedora docs was moved to a potential follow up
13:32:34 <bexelbie> +1 to docs :)
13:32:37 <dperpeet> dgilmore, getting tests in place doesn't require infrastructure changes
13:32:42 <dgilmore> +100 to docs
13:32:45 <dperpeet> the pipeline puts results into pagure
13:32:51 <dperpeet> and onto the message bus
13:32:54 * mattdm notes that the magazine does not seem to make the date of publication obvious
13:33:04 <dgilmore> dperpeet: okay, so how do the tests get run then?
13:33:11 * dgilmore can look at that offline
13:33:12 <dperpeet> that said, there should be an unfreeze in ~2 weeks
13:33:21 * mattdm afk for two minutes. continue without me please
13:34:04 <dperpeet> not sure how much I should rathole here, but pingou and the others working on this assure me that everything can be ready by the time the freeze is lifted in ~2 weeks :)
13:34:15 <dgilmore> dperpeet: I will take it offline
13:34:40 <dperpeet> thanks, happy to answer more detailed questions, maybe in #fedora-ci
13:34:41 <dgilmore> I assumed things will need to get deployed and I was just wanting to make sure that things were all taken into account
13:34:49 <pingou> dgilmore: they get run in a pipeline that's not frozen basically
13:36:13 <dperpeet> next on the roadmap is then pull request testing
13:36:13 <dgilmore> dperpeet: how have the AtomicHost test been going?
13:36:20 * mattdm is back
13:36:47 <dperpeet> dgilmore, the higher level ones? people started looking into them a few days ago
13:36:55 <dperpeet> I have to admit I haven't checked on the details since then
13:37:20 <dgilmore> dperpeet: no problem, was just curious how effective they were being found
13:37:22 <dperpeet> we should have something working in 2-3 weeks I'd say
13:37:40 <mattdm> dperpeet: What exactly is broken on the status page?
13:37:41 * dgilmore would like to see test set up for the anaconda runtime as a priority
13:37:55 <dperpeet> mattdm, wrong number of packages, and not just Atomic anymore
13:38:03 <mattdm> ah okay.
13:38:05 * dgilmore also does not know why he fails to type tests today
13:38:24 <mattdm> when you get that updated, can you ping me? I'm going to link it from https://docs.fedoraproject.org/fedora-project/project/objectives.html
13:38:29 <dperpeet> dgilmore, noted - due to PTO of the people involved, I expect more progress next week
13:38:36 <dperpeet> mattdm, will do, thank you
13:38:43 <dgilmore> dperpeet: awesome
13:38:46 <mattdm> dperpeet: also, do we have any badges related to CI?
13:38:55 <dperpeet> mattdm, I don't think we do
13:39:01 <pingou> not yet
13:39:03 <dperpeet> but we have testing related ones
13:39:15 <mattdm> dperpeet: let's make some!
13:39:47 <mattdm> You probably know what the specific things we want to emphasize/reward are, and what they might trigger on
13:40:14 <dperpeet> I can help brainstorm a few badge titles / descriptions
13:40:23 <mattdm> here's the link for suggesting new badges: https://pagure.io/Fedora-Badges
13:40:41 <mattdm> dperpeet: awesome. I think that'll help the publicity a little bit, and also will give me a graphic to put in the docs :)
13:40:51 <dperpeet> thank you, sounds good
13:40:55 <mattdm> dperpeet: anything else critical to mention?
13:41:05 <mattdm> if not, let's move on to modularity if langdon is still here....
13:41:05 <dperpeet> we have some discussions around metadata and where to put tests
13:41:12 <dperpeet> but I think that's ratholing
13:41:29 <dperpeet> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Flexible_Metadata_Format
13:41:30 <mattdm> yeah *I* don't care :)
13:41:32 <dperpeet> for who's interested
13:41:34 <langdon> im here
13:41:35 <dperpeet> done :)
13:41:41 <mattdm> cool. thanks dperpeet!
13:41:55 <mattdm> #topic Modularity objective update
13:42:10 <langdon> ohh good gracious
13:42:21 <mattdm> well that's an interesting start :)
13:42:37 <langdon> well.. normally i type a lot off to the side and c/p :)
13:42:57 <dgilmore> langdon: you re on the spot?
13:43:24 <mattdm> So I see that modular content *is* landing at
13:43:25 <langdon> so.. modularity is having an awesome time.. first and foremost.. we don't have support for modules in any package manager "not dnf" .. which is problematic if the module is carrying nvrs greater than the everything repo
13:43:26 <mattdm> https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/development/28/Modular/x86_64/os/Packages/
13:43:36 <langdon> howeveer, we are getting modular content
13:43:52 <langdon> and if you install fedora-repos-modular.. you get modules
13:44:09 <mattdm> dgilmore: is that subpackage subpackaged in the latest nightly?
13:44:17 <langdon> if you want to try it out easily docker run --rm -it langdon/addon-modular-boltron /bin/bash being built daily
13:44:30 <langdon> mattdm: last i knew it was in updates-testing for 28
13:44:37 <nb> hello
13:44:43 <mattdm> langdon: is that different from if I have a system running *regular* nightly?
13:44:48 <mattdm> oh hi nb!
13:44:50 <langdon> the docker container is actually built from a playbook you can look at
13:44:59 <mattdm> you may want to scroll back to the schedule discussion
13:45:09 <mattdm> langdon: that does not answer my question :)
13:45:22 <dgilmore> mattdm: should be yes
13:45:27 <langdon> mattdm: regular nightly of 28? no, i wouldn't think so.. or look at my (really sgallagh's) playbook
13:45:48 <langdon> for me.. i don't have enough detail on what "regular nightly" means to know for sure
13:46:17 <mattdm> langdon: a build of F28 Server that is basically what the release would look like if we released today
13:46:24 <bexelbie> to make sure I am separating humor from concern, are we supposed to have support for modules in dnf ... I thought that was the plan
13:46:44 <langdon> bexelbie: the problem is all the OTHER package managers.. e.g package kit
13:46:49 <sgallagh> mattdm: Yes, it was pushed to the stable repo yesterday and should be in the next successful compose
13:46:54 <mattdm> bexelbie: The problem is that we *only* have support in DNF. The plan was to have support in *libdnf* so packagekit and microdnf would also pick it up
13:46:57 <mattdm> but that did not happen
13:47:01 <sgallagh> Last night's broke for other reasons
13:47:18 * bexelbie isn't going to ask about why we have so many package managers :D
13:47:23 <bexelbie> do we have a plan for correcting that?
13:47:26 <mattdm> sgallagh: last night's compose or last night's modularity something?
13:47:31 <bexelbie> or are we moving forward with a plan B?
13:47:31 <sgallagh> compose
13:47:53 <mattdm> I think the current plan is to only enable modularity for the Server release, where DNF is the standard package manager anyway
13:47:54 <sgallagh> bexelbie: Workaround right now is that we won't ship the modular repos anywhere but Server Edition
13:48:01 <mattdm> that is, not Workstation or Atomic
13:48:09 <langdon> right
13:48:10 <sgallagh> But longer-term, we're going to fix that in libdnf. We don't have a committed timetable on that yet
13:48:11 <bexelbie> sgallagh, ahh
13:48:24 <mattdm> However, this is problematic for container images, where microdnf is supposed to shine
13:48:31 <bexelbie> I can see that
13:48:49 <bexelbie> I was also thinking it is a shame to not have our new hotness in the other newish thing too :D
13:49:00 <langdon> microdnf install dnf
13:49:28 * mattdm still thinks dnf should *be*  microdnf and it should automatically install full dnf if you make any calls it doesn't understand
13:49:29 <langdon> snark aside .. FROM fedora-minimal \n RUN microdnf install dnf is still a TON smaller than FROM fedora
13:49:57 <mattdm> okay, so, I guess we can live with that
13:50:13 <mattdm> #info For F28, Modular repo will only be enabled by default for Server
13:50:32 <mattdm> #info You can opt-in by installing the repo package on other releases, but beware issues with packagekit and microdnf
13:50:45 <mattdm> Other than that, are we basically on track?
13:51:16 <mattdm> dgilmore: do you know what's up with the isolinux/iso directories in the Modular tree?
13:51:20 <langdon> modules themselves are kinda behind.. we have "some" but not a lot..
13:51:30 <langdon> the content can land post f28 ga though
13:51:54 <langdon> and we need to fixx issues with the ~40 we had before 27 to make them use the new arch
13:52:11 <mattdm> langdon: is there a burndown-style tracker for that?
13:52:21 <langdon> mattdm: not that i am aware of
13:52:26 <mattdm> langdon: can you make one? :)
13:52:38 <langdon> yeah..
13:52:42 <mattdm> thanks :)
13:52:56 <dgilmore> mattdm: yes, we got apatch in pungi for it yesterday
13:53:10 <dgilmore> mattdm: we need to get a new pungi and make a config change to turn it off
13:53:24 <mattdm> dgilmore: okay, cool. because while it techically doesn't hurt beyond wasting space, I can see it really confusing some people who go browsing around the tree
13:53:34 <mattdm> "hey, this modular install doesn't work"
13:53:36 <dgilmore> mattdm: indeed
13:53:39 <bexelbie> you and your url "hacking" mattdm ...
13:53:40 <bexelbie> :P
13:54:06 <mattdm> yes, clicking that "Parent directory" link. Such a hacker!
13:54:12 <mattdm> okay, five minutes left....
13:54:16 <mattdm> #topic Mindshare FAD
13:54:39 <mattdm> robyduck isn't here... but nb and bexelbie and langdon and I were all also at that FAD
13:54:46 * x3mboy is lurking
13:55:01 <mattdm> rather than summarizing things here, bexelbie, there's an commblog article coming soon? is that right?
13:55:07 <bexelbie> yes
13:55:17 <bexelbie> the draft is due by Friday for review by the group (x3mboy is writing it)
13:55:22 <bexelbie> and we plan to publish next week
13:55:30 <mattdm> #info Stay tuned for Mindshare update next week
13:55:34 <bexelbie> It, like the Docs FAD, was super productive
13:55:37 <bexelbie> that's my teaser
13:55:41 <mattdm> cool :)
13:56:00 <pingou> spoiler!
13:56:00 <mattdm> okay, peter doesn't seem to have shown up, so we'll talk about IoT next time
13:56:01 <x3mboy> The draft will be ready tomorrow night in my TZ
13:56:07 <mattdm> x3mboy++
13:56:07 <zodbot> mattdm: Karma for x3mboy changed to 21 (for the f27 release cycle):  https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any
13:56:11 <bexelbie> x3mboy++
13:56:31 <mattdm> okay, so, I'm going to go update the meeting times
13:56:43 <langdon> mattdm: whats the finall answer?
13:56:47 <langdon> im confused...
13:56:55 <mattdm> langdon: for meeting times?
13:56:57 <langdon> right
13:57:03 <langdon> 3pm eastern weds?
13:57:10 <langdon> 12?
13:57:17 <mattdm> 3pm est wed three weeks, with one week at 12
13:57:36 <mattdm> we'll see how insane that is :)
13:57:43 <langdon> ok
13:58:07 <mattdm> thanks everyone
13:58:09 <mattdm> #endmeeting