2024-05-15 16:29:16 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> !startmeeting fedora_coreos_meeting 2024-05-15 16:29:19 <@meetbot:fedora.im> Meeting started at 2024-05-15 16:29:16 UTC 2024-05-15 16:29:20 <@meetbot:fedora.im> The Meeting name is 'fedora_coreos_meeting' 2024-05-15 16:30:02 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> !topic roll call 2024-05-15 16:31:15 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> !hi 2024-05-15 16:31:16 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> !hi 2024-05-15 16:31:17 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Dusty Mabe (dustymabe) - he / him / his 2024-05-15 16:31:19 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Jean-Baptiste Trystram (jbtrystram) - he / him / his 2024-05-15 16:31:25 <@dogphilosopher:fedora.im> !hi 2024-05-15 16:31:29 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Noel Miller (dogphilosopher) 2024-05-15 16:31:33 <@hricky:fedora.im> !hi 2024-05-15 16:31:37 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Hristo Marinov (hricky) - he / him / his 2024-05-15 16:32:00 <@jmarrero:matrix.org> !hi jmarrero 2024-05-15 16:32:05 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Joseph Marrero (jmarrero) 2024-05-15 16:32:14 <@gurssing:matrix.org> !hi gursewak 2024-05-15 16:32:17 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Gursewak Singh (gursewak) 2024-05-15 16:32:39 <@ravanelli:matrix.org> !hi ravanelli 2024-05-15 16:32:44 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Renata Ravanelli (ravanelli) 2024-05-15 16:33:03 <@marmijo:fedora.im> !hi 2024-05-15 16:33:07 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Michael Armijo (marmijo) 2024-05-15 16:33:27 <@jlebon:fedora.im> !hi 2024-05-15 16:33:30 <@zodbot:fedora.im> None (jlebon) 2024-05-15 16:34:27 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> Ok, let's start ! 2024-05-15 16:35:04 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> !topic Action items from last meeting 2024-05-15 16:35:05 <@mnguyen:fedora.im> !hi 2024-05-15 16:35:08 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Michael Nguyen (mnguyen) 2024-05-15 16:35:22 <@apiaseck:matrix.org> .hi 2024-05-15 16:35:25 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> The only action item was : dustymabe to find someone to help wrangle changes considerations for the F41 cycle 2024-05-15 16:35:34 <@apiaseck:matrix.org> !hi 2024-05-15 16:35:37 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Adam Piasecki (c4rt0) - he / him / his 2024-05-15 16:35:50 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> dustymabe: any progress on that ? 2024-05-15 16:35:52 <@siosm:matrix.org> .hi 2024-05-15 16:36:02 <@siosm:matrix.org> !hi 2024-05-15 16:36:05 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Timothée Ravier (siosm) - he / him / his 2024-05-15 16:36:48 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> jbtrystram: I think a few people volunteered recently (I think marmijo was one) to sit in on a session with me going over the process.. we still haven't done that yet, though. 2024-05-15 16:37:16 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> !info dustymabe and a few people will get together this week to cover an overview of the changes process we follow and try to pick it up for the F41 cycle 2024-05-15 16:37:49 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> Awesome. Thanks marmijo 2024-05-15 16:38:22 <@marmijo:fedora.im> Of course! Let me know when you want to meet. 2024-05-15 16:38:25 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> i guess there isn't anything else to add ? I'll proceed with the topics, we have quite a few today 2024-05-15 16:38:56 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> The first one is for you dustymabe 2024-05-15 16:38:58 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> !topic revisit python discussion 2024-05-15 16:39:08 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> !link https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/1730 2024-05-15 16:39:17 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> oh yay :) 2024-05-15 16:39:19 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> !link https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/1730 2024-05-15 16:41:15 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> I put most of my reasoning in the ticket, but to quickly recap.. anecdotally I think our efforts to keep python out of Fedora CoreOS have hurt us more than they have helped us. In a perfect world we would "do all the things"TM that would be necessary to ship what we need to without including python, but practically I think what ends up happening is that we just leave pieces unimplemented or ignore the problems that result. 2024-05-15 16:42:35 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> copying in a few thing from the ticket (so excuse formatting): - Package splitting.. We did manage to get some packages split out so that python deps were isolated to a sub package, but that was a lot of work and there are still some that aren't right: - The [nfs-utils](https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/121) saga is [still not completely sorted out](https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/572) - We have had to keep out things that I think represent basic level functionality - like [firewalld](https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/26#issuecomment-415161012) - and [basic level SELinux tools](https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/126) (like `semanage`) that people expects to be there (https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/126) - Also integrating with things like `ansible` hasn't really been able to work well (maybe some people have figured it out??). I know we have Ignition and things are supposed to be 'immutable', but practically people need to make small tweaks periodically. - fwupd, which we [shipped not too long ago](https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/449) [appears broken](https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/1623#issuecomment-1851904401) because it dynamically depends on some python libraries to exist. I'm not saying we do want to include those libraries, just that we can't even consider it right now. 2024-05-15 16:43:02 <@jmarrero:matrix.org> If https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/1730#issuecomment-2110740191 means we are going to get it either way. I say we add it earlier than later. 2024-05-15 16:43:48 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> :) - I think that might be putting the cart before the horse - we haven't really had bootc discussions here in this meeting.. a lot of indirect, but not a lot of direct 2024-05-15 16:44:05 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> I think this conversation is worth having on its own, independent of bootc 2024-05-15 16:44:52 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> i just read through the initial reasoning for excluding python and I don't really get it 2024-05-15 16:45:11 <@siosm:matrix.org> yeah, it's not entirely a given that we have to match the content of the bootc image 2024-05-15 16:45:32 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> "prevent users from running scripts" but we still ship bash ? I know it's a stretch to compare them but still 2024-05-15 16:46:15 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> jbtrystram: without reading the original ticket, my recollection is that it basically boils down to a few things: 1. less attack surface (maintenance) for us (i.e. python CVEs or features/changes we don't even have to consider) 2. encouraging people to use containers for things, whereas otherwise they might be inclined to just copy in a python script 2024-05-15 16:46:24 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> total noob question : is the python binary that big or have a huge CVE history ? 2024-05-15 16:46:48 <@ravanelli:matrix.org> The users can always install it by their own, in the way the need. 2024-05-15 16:47:11 <@jlebon:fedora.im> i'm mixed about this, because it also worked as a way to keep packages out. the implied statement of this proposal is that we'd add packages we're currently not shipping. and more packages is more overhead and things to keep track of, especially when we're dragging in a whole ecosystem. OTOH, i totally recognize that it hasn't been easy to maintain this stance 2024-05-15 16:47:27 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> Is that an argument for continuing to deny python inclusion? 2024-05-15 16:47:33 <@siosm:matrix.org> The binary itself is not that big but it comes with libraries and modules that quickly add up 2024-05-15 16:48:16 <@siosm:matrix.org> Note that we would also have to deal with https://github.com/ostreedev/ostree/issues/1469 2024-05-15 16:49:53 <@ravanelli:matrix.org> The question is, about the others packages as fwupd, firewalld ... there is other way to fix it? Unless we include python? 2024-05-15 16:50:15 <@siosm:matrix.org> I'm mixed as well as it's needed for some important things, but I also don't like it as it's a big size increase and sends the wrong message 2024-05-15 16:50:22 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> so regarding "maintenance" and "new package inclusion" arguments, I'll argue that we have done more work by trying to get others to change their packages 2024-05-15 16:50:40 <@siosm:matrix.org> but that kept FCOS smaller 2024-05-15 16:50:45 <@jlebon:fedora.im> in theory, firewalld should be able to work from a container, but I doubt it's commonly used that way and would require some effort to proof out and document 2024-05-15 16:51:29 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> correcnt, but it also feels like something the system should provide (i.e. a firewall shouldn't be something that needs to be either layered or run as a container) 2024-05-15 16:51:50 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> to put it a different way, would firewalld be in FCOS today if it wasn't python based (i.e. written in rust or something) 2024-05-15 16:52:20 <@ravanelli:matrix.org> Yeah, probably it would be there 2024-05-15 16:53:22 <@siosm:matrix.org> I would argue more for semanage tools or more udev rules 2024-05-15 16:53:36 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> travier: fair :) 2024-05-15 16:53:41 <@jmarrero:matrix.org> I think if we do this and include firewalld and semanage etc, then how we stop x and y tools to be continuously added to the image? We would need to form a hard stand about something else. 2024-05-15 16:53:57 <@jmarrero:matrix.org> Or are we changing the stance to just allowing anything that is a expected tool. 2024-05-15 16:54:11 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> jmarrero: we still have our package inclusion request issue template - we can still say no to things 2024-05-15 16:54:23 <@siosm:matrix.org> Each tool should be evaluated on their own like we already do 2024-05-15 16:54:29 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> i.e. for example 2024-05-15 16:54:48 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> depending on the outcome of this ticket.. we still wouldn't just go straight and add python to FCOS 2024-05-15 16:55:01 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> we'd first open a ticket for each tool to evaluate if we want to include it 2024-05-15 16:55:19 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> but we needed to clear this hurdle first, because it's not worth having those conversations otherwise 2024-05-15 16:56:42 <@ravanelli:matrix.org> Firewalld is a widely recognized tool that might offer a simpler solution compared to configuring udev rules maybe. Does fedora include firewalld as part of its default installation? I guess so 2024-05-15 16:57:43 <@ravanelli:matrix.org> I have mix feeling about adding python as well, but I see firewalld as a base packed 2024-05-15 16:57:47 <@siosm:matrix.org> iptables & nft are also widely used 2024-05-15 16:58:02 <@siosm:matrix.org> I would argue firewalld is very niche 2024-05-15 16:58:09 <@siosm:matrix.org> especially on servers 2024-05-15 16:58:15 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> > Does fedora include firewalld as part of its default installation? I guess so yes, in server/workstation but, not in cloud (though think cloud is meant specifically for cloud env where security groups exist) 2024-05-15 16:59:05 <@jlebon:fedora.im> right, firewalld is not the only wrapper around iptables/nftables that exist. we don't ship it in RHCOS either for example 2024-05-15 16:59:30 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> we don't support RHCOS in single node use cases and Openshift handles the firewall there 2024-05-15 16:59:51 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> though, maybe we should take the conversation back the the higher level 2024-05-15 17:00:03 <@siosm:matrix.org> firewalld is also one of the biggest offender on my laptop for boot time, so I don't think we'll want to enable it by default, etc. but that's deviating from the python discussion 2024-05-15 17:00:06 <@jlebon:fedora.im> right, my point is that firewalld is not the only thing that exists in this area 2024-05-15 17:00:22 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> neither is NetworkManager? 2024-05-15 17:01:19 <@jlebon:fedora.im> right? a big part of bringing up python again is for firewalld, right? 2024-05-15 17:01:27 <@siosm:matrix.org> NetworkManager takes longer, but I can not really do without network :) 2024-05-15 17:01:33 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> no, I mean I listed out a few different reasons 2024-05-15 17:01:45 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> i think it's a culmination of things 2024-05-15 17:02:00 <@ravanelli:matrix.org> Which of these packages can we say are absolutely necessary? and depend on python? 2024-05-15 17:02:38 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> new stuff comes up all the time - like https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/1122#issuecomment-2102779351 "oh great, this will solve a problem for us" EDIT: It needs python 2024-05-15 17:02:58 <@ravanelli:matrix.org> If we can live without it, I say we don't need python? 2024-05-15 17:03:19 <@siosm:matrix.org> I personally think that no system package should depend on an interpreted language. But I know that's a difficult stance and we have tons of bash scripts. 2024-05-15 17:03:49 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> travier: and up until recently (dnf5) you'd have no RHEL or Fedora 2024-05-15 17:04:32 <@jlebon:fedora.im> which both predate the rise of minimal OSes and containers :) 2024-05-15 17:04:42 <@jmarrero:matrix.org> firewalld is part of the tools used on RHCSA to manage the firewall 2024-05-15 17:05:25 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> I'm happy with the conversation (quite lively and productive), but also don't want to capture the entire meeting on this one topic 2024-05-15 17:06:05 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> happy to keep going or try to find some stopping point if we can agree on what we would like next steps to be (i.e. decision, some investigation, etc) 2024-05-15 17:06:21 <@jmarrero:matrix.org> Same for semanage* so a lot of Fedora, CentOS and RHEL users I bet expect these tools to be there and have no issues with python being a dependency of their package. 2024-05-15 17:07:15 <@siosm:matrix.org> for semanage: https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/managing-selinux-in-fedora-coreos/116733 2024-05-15 17:07:44 <@siosm:matrix.org> (not going either way) 2024-05-15 17:07:50 <@siosm:matrix.org> (not going either way, neither a +1 or -1) 2024-05-15 17:07:52 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> travier: :) 2024-05-15 17:08:38 <@jmarrero:matrix.org> I am leaning +1 2024-05-15 17:09:28 <@siosm:matrix.org> Let's sleep on it and talk about it again next week? 2024-05-15 17:09:39 <@siosm:matrix.org> otherwise it's going to take the entire meeting 2024-05-15 17:10:06 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> travier: sounds good.. maybe we can all agree to at least think about it a little? 2024-05-15 17:10:45 <@jlebon:fedora.im> SGTM 2024-05-15 17:10:49 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> i.e. do we think the pain and work we have caused ourselves by not having it (think there are many packages where we never included them or it took a really long time because of the no-python stance) 2024-05-15 17:11:18 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> i.e. do we think the pain and work we have caused ourselves by not having it (think there are many packages where we never included them or it took a really long time because of the no-python stance) has been worth it. to me it feels a bit like we are fighting against the ecosystem that RHEL and Fedora have fostered 2024-05-15 17:12:08 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> !info take some time to consider the python discussion from this week's meeting (see transcript) and we will discuss next week 2024-05-15 17:12:50 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> !action : All to think about the python discussion 2024-05-15 17:13:32 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> Ok let's move on to the next topic :) 2024-05-15 17:13:35 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> !topic NetworkManager-team & teamd not included in C10S 2024-05-15 17:13:46 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> !link https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/1727 2024-05-15 17:14:06 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> This one is from travier 2024-05-15 17:16:05 <@siosm:matrix.org> I've not confirmed things yet but apparently those packages are not going to be included in CentOS Stream 10 2024-05-15 17:16:33 <@siosm:matrix.org> so we don't have to do anything in FCOS, but we can consider removing them. We would need a deprecation phase, etc. 2024-05-15 17:17:02 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> so this is kind of a "if it's not in stream 10, it won't be in RHEL 10, so it won't be in RHCOS" logic? 2024-05-15 17:17:19 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> How are people supposed to do teaming ? kargs only ? 2024-05-15 17:17:44 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> I always felt teaming was a bit of an idea, but not many people used it over bonding 2024-05-15 17:18:16 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> IIUC teaming is just another form of bonding, but it uses a userspace utility and not the built in kernel functionality 2024-05-15 17:18:21 <@siosm:matrix.org> I've never used it so I don't know. We would probably need someone to reach out to the networking team to chat about it? 2024-05-15 17:18:25 <@jlebon:fedora.im> wait, is teaming older or newer than the bonding support? 2024-05-15 17:18:38 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> teaming is newer IIUC 2024-05-15 17:18:58 <@jlebon:fedora.im> ok, that's what i thought. rhbz https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1935544 says: > The already available replacement is the bonding driver which makes it sound like the opposite 2024-05-15 17:19:03 <@jlebon:fedora.im> ok, that's what i thought. rhbz https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show\_bug.cgi?id=1935544 says: > The already available replacement is the bonding driver which makes it sound like the opposite 2024-05-15 17:19:34 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> teaming seems to be more featureful according to https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_enterprise_linux/7/html/networking_guide/sec-comparison_of_network_teaming_to_bonding 2024-05-15 17:19:35 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> that bug is private 2024-05-15 17:19:48 <@jlebon:fedora.im> dustymabe: gahhh, sorry 2024-05-15 17:20:02 <@jlebon:fedora.im> i was trying to find the original reason behind the removal 2024-05-15 17:20:13 <@jlebon:fedora.im> it seems like it was already marked as deprecated in RHEL9 2024-05-15 17:20:53 <@jlebon:fedora.im> https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_enterprise_linux/9/html/9.4_release_notes/deprecated-functionality#deprecated-functionality-networking 2024-05-15 17:21:29 <@jlebon:fedora.im> given that it's the same maintainers in Fedora, we should probably also consider removing support for it from FCOS too 2024-05-15 17:21:55 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> right. I asked two questions in the ticket: will it be removed from upstream or from Fedora? even if it isn't removed from upstream or from Fedora should we consider removing it from FCOS? 2024-05-15 17:22:10 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> in the case of 1. we have no decision to make here - just action for when it happens 2024-05-15 17:22:19 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> in the case of 2. we'd need to decide that 2024-05-15 17:22:40 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> maybe let's find out the answer to 1. first and then we can discuss 2. ? 2024-05-15 17:22:56 <@jlebon:fedora.im> SGTM 2024-05-15 17:23:21 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> would be great if we could get a volunteer to reach out to the NM team to ask about this 2024-05-15 17:23:29 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> I imagine they would be the ones who might know 2024-05-15 17:23:38 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> any takers? 2024-05-15 17:24:32 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> (and as always, this is a learning experience for someone) 2024-05-15 17:24:39 <@siosm:matrix.org> Well, I can do it, but would be good if someone else did 2024-05-15 17:24:46 <@siosm:matrix.org> to create connections regarding networking 2024-05-15 17:25:10 <@ravanelli:matrix.org> I can 2024-05-15 17:25:23 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> 🎉 2024-05-15 17:25:35 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> jbtrystram: want to action that? 2024-05-15 17:26:17 <@ravanelli:matrix.org> travier: if you can share some contact with me ;) 2024-05-15 17:26:35 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> !action ravanelli to contact the libteam maintainers to figure out if they intend to drop the package from fedora 2024-05-15 17:26:38 <@siosm:matrix.org> Renata Ravanelli: sure, let's sync about that :) 2024-05-15 17:27:09 <@siosm:matrix.org> let's move to open discussion? 2024-05-15 17:27:28 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> https://lists.fedorahosted.org/archives/list/libteam@lists.fedorahosted.org/thread/YETC5RAS3QZAFFJT5KNDLJURNWSIOA4Q/ 2024-05-15 17:28:24 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> we couldn't go trough all the topics so I'll re-add the labels for next week :) 2024-05-15 17:28:25 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> !topic Open Floor 2024-05-15 17:29:25 <@siosm:matrix.org> Well, you'll have to not remove them :) 2024-05-15 17:30:00 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> Hopefully next time we'll have F41 changes to go through! 2024-05-15 17:30:30 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> I have a quick question 2024-05-15 17:30:36 <@jlebon:fedora.im> do we want to do a video meeting soon to go over https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/1726 ? 2024-05-15 17:32:28 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> I've been looking at the releng side of things today , and I am unsure about the purpose of the `bodhi-updates` stream. If all changes there are automatically added to `testing-devel` through the `bump-lockfile` job, why not simply have `testing-devel` pull rpm from the updates repo and remove the bodhi-update stream ? 2024-05-15 17:33:06 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> I think at one time we believed we needed it, but we haven't used it in a long time. I think we can drop it 2024-05-15 17:33:14 <@dogphilosopher:fedora.im> How do video meetings typically get scheduled? 2024-05-15 17:34:20 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> oh so I am not missing a detail :) I'll file something so it can be discussed further. Thanks 2024-05-15 17:34:45 <@apiaseck:matrix.org> Need to drop, thanks for running jbtrystram. Thanks all. 2024-05-15 17:34:59 <@siosm:matrix.org> https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/779 2024-05-15 17:35:23 <@siosm:matrix.org> dogphilosopher: we make an issue about it and announce it 2024-05-15 17:35:57 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> yeah. we'd like to do it more, but it's more work to set up than the IRC meeting 2024-05-15 17:36:11 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> so someone would have to own organizing it more 2024-05-15 17:36:24 <@dogphilosopher:fedora.im> I am very +1 on this idea. 2024-05-15 17:36:30 <@siosm:matrix.org> and it needs a dedicated secretaryu 2024-05-15 17:36:32 <@siosm:matrix.org> and it needs a dedicated secretary 2024-05-15 17:36:33 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> (and also capturing the discussion in text form for others outside of the meeting to consume) 2024-05-15 17:37:29 <@dogphilosopher:fedora.im> Is there any kind of transcription software we can use? 2024-05-15 17:38:12 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> maybe :) 2024-05-15 17:38:15 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> I need to run for now 2024-05-15 17:38:21 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> thanks jbtrystram for running the meeting! 2024-05-15 17:38:41 <@siosm:matrix.org> There is a transcript functionality in Google Meet but it's never fully accurate and does not follow the formalism of decisions, etc 2024-05-15 17:40:05 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> also the video calls are really high bandwidth which is more productive but make following the discussion way harder for the new members 2024-05-15 17:40:08 <@jlebon:fedora.im> agree re. taking notes i think we can chat about this in #coreos:fedoraproject.org. we'll announce it if it happens next week. 2024-05-15 17:40:45 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> if there is nothing else i'll end the meeting :) 2024-05-15 17:41:48 <@siosm:matrix.org> sounds good. we are overtime 2024-05-15 17:41:53 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> !endmeeting