16:00:52 <sgallagh> #startmeeting ELN (2023-06-23)
16:00:52 <zodbot> Meeting started Fri Jun 23 16:00:52 2023 UTC.
16:00:52 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
16:00:52 <zodbot> The chair is sgallagh. Information about MeetBot at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Zodbot#Meeting_Functions.
16:00:52 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
16:00:52 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'eln_(2023-06-23)'
16:00:52 <sgallagh> #meetingname eln
16:00:52 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'eln'
16:00:52 <sgallagh> #topic init process
16:00:52 <sgallagh> .hi
16:00:53 <zodbot> sgallagh: Something blew up, please try again
16:00:56 <zodbot> sgallagh: An error has occurred and has been logged. Please contact this bot's administrator for more information.
16:01:43 <sgallagh> .hi
16:01:44 <zodbot> sgallagh: Something blew up, please try again
16:01:47 <zodbot> sgallagh: An error has occurred and has been logged. Please contact this bot's administrator for more information.
16:02:05 <tdawson> Hi sgallagh ... your name is <fill in this blank>
16:02:10 <sgallagh> Who have we got today?
16:02:27 <tdawson> I'm here
16:02:31 <bstinson> .hi
16:02:32 <zodbot> bstinson: Something blew up, please try again
16:02:35 <zodbot> bstinson: An error has occurred and has been logged. Please contact this bot's administrator for more information.
16:02:40 <sgallagh> 🎵 If you don't know me by now... 🎵
16:02:42 <yselkowitz[m]> .hello yselkowitz
16:02:43 <zodbot> yselkowitz[m]: Something blew up, please try again
16:02:46 <zodbot> yselkowitz[m]: An error has occurred and has been logged. Please contact this bot's administrator for more information.
16:03:52 <bstinson> the bot doesn't know who we are...are we really here?
16:05:05 <sgallagh> I don't know 😭
16:05:22 <sgallagh> Alright, let's get started
16:05:50 <sgallagh> There's not (yet) anyone here who isn't a Red Hat employee, so let's cover the mass-rebuild topic first.
16:06:15 <sgallagh> Since the baseline question really deserves outside input
16:07:39 <sgallagh> #topic ELN runtime mass-rebuild
16:08:55 <sgallagh> As previously announced, we're going to run a targeted mass-rebuild of the runtime package set of ELN starting next week.
16:09:35 <sgallagh> The original plan was for Monday, but I think tdawson had at least one reservation to raise.
16:11:31 <sgallagh> Troy?
16:12:04 <tdawson> Well, I had thought I was doing the mass rebuild, and I was rather busy monday.  But it sounds like it's you (sgallagh) doing the mass rebuild ... and if that is the case, I have no problem.
16:12:14 <sgallagh> Ah, ok
16:12:37 <tdawson> So I withdraw my reservation.
16:12:54 <sgallagh> Just so you know, it's non-refundable
16:13:29 <tdawson> Ah man ... I didn't read the fine print. :(
16:13:38 <sgallagh> OK, so the remaining question to answer is the one I put in the announcement email: do we do this rebuild rawhide-style or "conservative"-style.
16:14:15 <sgallagh> Given that the python 3.12 side-tag is still in full swing, I think Rawhide-style is probably a Really Bad Idea™
16:14:15 <yselkowitz[m]> iiuc rawhide style would depend on the py3.12 rebuild completing?
16:14:25 <yselkowitz[m]> what you said :-)
16:14:41 <tdawson> My preference is "conservative" style ... I think we'll get less "pushed to dist-git but hasn't rebuilt yet" issues.
16:14:59 <sgallagh> The conservative approach is more complicated, but likely to be as tdawson says
16:15:26 <sgallagh> Does anyone want to argue in favor of the Rawhide approach?
16:16:01 <yselkowitz[m]> not this time
16:17:14 <sgallagh> #agreed We will take the conservative approach to the mass-rebuild. This means rebuilding the packages from the git hash matching the current latest-tagged package in ELN.
16:19:54 <sgallagh> #topic Processor baselines
16:20:44 <sgallagh> At this point, we've attempted to have this discussion for at least three consecutive meetings and no interested parties have joined.
16:21:07 <sgallagh> I'm inclined to interpret this as disinterest in the change.
16:21:37 <tdawson> Is this the i686 change?  or the x86_64-v3 change?
16:22:28 <bstinson> small data point for x86_64-v3, there are 2 lines listed on the RHEL 9 support matrix that will be affected (Intel Atom C series processors, and Intel Celeron N Series processors)
16:22:45 <bstinson> everything else listed in the catalog for RHEL 9 seems to support x86_64-v3
16:24:03 <tdawson> Since I'm pretty sure Intel wants us to go to x86_64-v3 ... Are they planning on updating those processors, or just dropping them?
16:24:22 <tdawson> Sorry, I just realized that if anyone knew that information, they wouldn't be able to tell me.
16:24:29 <bstinson> we're in contact with Intel about their intentions
16:24:38 <bstinson> that's the best i can say here
16:24:49 <tdawson> Fair enough
16:26:54 <sgallagh> As for i686, I think we're still proceeding with "keep it for now, we'll very likely kill it in the morning" as a plan?
16:27:13 <bstinson> it's out of the composes, so now's the time to start testing!
16:28:22 <tdawson> So, for i686 we are building packages, but keeping them out of the composes.  correct?
16:28:54 <bstinson> correct
16:30:17 <tdawson> For x86_64-v3 ... we've already turned it on for ELN, correct?
16:31:06 <sgallagh> Yes, I think close to a year ago now
16:31:26 <sgallagh> And we literally had our first issue with it this week, funnily enough
16:31:42 <bstinson> a full rebuild will catch anything that hasn't updated since then
16:32:22 <sgallagh> Yes
16:32:47 <sgallagh> Though I think that would have happened during the F38 mass-rebuild anyway
16:36:30 <sgallagh> Well, with no one here to disagree (again), I suppose we accept that as a mandate :)
16:36:45 <tdawson> I agree
16:37:59 <sgallagh> For the purposes of the meeting log: the issue we had this week was due to openqa's chosen runners only supporting x86_64-v2. That was quickly resolved.
16:39:15 <yselkowitz[m]> another recent issue was openexr, but that turned out to be an issue in the code
16:40:51 <sgallagh> Ack
16:41:24 <sgallagh> OK, I'm running out of things to say and no one else appears to be popping up out of the woodwork to yell at us.
16:41:31 <sgallagh> #topic Open Floor
16:41:38 <sgallagh> Any other topics for today?
16:41:43 <yselkowitz[m]> https://pagure.io/releng/issue/11475
16:41:56 <yselkowitz[m]> ELN branch requests
16:42:19 <tdawson> Oh ... that's what I was going to document
16:42:33 <sgallagh> tdawson: How is that coming along?
16:43:38 <yselkowitz[m]> don't get me wrong, we want the documentation, but the situation now is that releng has not complied with the request because the package admin has pushed back
16:43:39 <tdawson> slowly because I forgot about it and kept trying to figure out what it was I forgot about .
16:43:55 <yselkowitz[m]> if ELN SIG doesn't have the final say on ELN branches, who does?
16:44:17 <bstinson> i have a couple of discussions open with the maintainers involved
16:45:29 <decathorpe> funnily enough, Rust packages maintained by community members should now all be resolved, the remaining ones are blocked by RH people 🤭
16:47:15 <sgallagh> Yes. Funny. 😧
16:47:30 <decathorpe> sure, in the sense of "funny for me, not for you" :)
16:47:50 <sgallagh> bstinson: Anything noteworthy coming of that?
16:48:09 <bstinson> not much yet, but i'll see what the next day or so brings
16:48:22 <bstinson> for better or worse, red hatters are community members too :)
16:49:57 <sgallagh> OK, let's leave it at that for the moment.
16:50:16 * sgallagh decides not to make any CLMs today.
16:50:55 <sgallagh> I think the obvious next step is to get that documentation in place so we can at least approve it formally in the SIG and have something to point to
16:51:51 <tdawson> Now that I've remembered that's what I'm doing, I've already got the editor up and I'm putting it together right now.
16:51:56 <decathorpe> note from the cheap seats: if there will be policy around creation of eln branches, it might be good for FESCo to approve that too, to make it "official", similar to EPEL policy
16:52:12 <tdawson> Very good point.
16:52:37 <sgallagh> Not unreasonable
16:52:45 <sgallagh> Thanks for the suggestion
16:52:55 <decathorpe> just so you can't be accused of working in a silo :)
16:53:29 <sgallagh> Oh, that won't impact the accusions at all.
16:53:54 <sgallagh> Have you ever read fedora-devel?
16:54:49 <decathorpe> to the contrary, I read it so much it's all starting to mush together into soup
16:55:15 <sgallagh> In any case, I think we're running out of productive discussion here today.
16:55:27 <tdawson> And time
16:55:34 <sgallagh> That too
16:55:41 <sgallagh> Thank you all for joining us today.
16:56:35 <sgallagh> #endmeeting