<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:00:17
!startmeeting EPEL (2024-07-24)
<@meetbot:fedora.im>
18:00:18
Meeting started at 2024-07-24 18:00:17 UTC
<@meetbot:fedora.im>
18:00:18
The Meeting name is 'EPEL (2024-07-24)'
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:00:22
!meetingname epel
<@meetbot:fedora.im>
18:00:22
The Meeting Name is now epel
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:00:26
!topic aloha
<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>
18:00:44
!hi
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:00:46
morning
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:00:46
Carl George (carlwgeorge) - he / him / his
<@pgreco:fedora.im>
18:00:55
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:00:56
Pablo Sebastian Greco (pgreco)
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:01:03
Hi Carl George and Pablo Greco
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:01:09
Morning nirik
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:01:18
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:01:19
Michel Lind (salimma) - he / him / his
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:01:19
Howdy Stephen J Smoogen
<@smooge:fedora.im>
18:01:25
hello
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:01:37
Hi Michel Lind 🎩
<@davide:cavalca.name>
18:02:32
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:02:33
Davide Cavalca (dcavalca) - he / him / his
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:03:20
Hi Davide Cavalca
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:05:29
For those that didn't notice last week, we no longer have an EOL topic on the Agenda ... so moving to the next thing.
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:05:35
!topic EPEL Issues https://pagure.io/epel/issues
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:05:40
https://pagure.io/epel/issues?tags=meeting&status=Open
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:06:04
We have several items this week. I'd like to start with the updates first.
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:06:21
https://pagure.io/epel/issue/282
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:07:47
Although the issue was opened only a few days ago, the update has been worked on for about a month I think.
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:08:06
Oh, no, just a couple weeks. I misread a date.
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:08:44
Wait ... ugg ... I'm sorry, this is the one we talked about last week, and it got a +6 vote on it.
<@pgreco:fedora.im>
18:09:15
yeah, seems to only need the confirmation that it's got the all good from us
<@pgreco:fedora.im>
18:09:32
according to carl's last comment
<@nhanlon:beeper.com>
18:09:43
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:09:44
Neil Hanlon (neil) - he / him / his
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:09:51
Hi Neil Hanlon
<@rcallicotte:fedora.im>
18:10:04
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:10:05
Robby Callicotte (rcallicotte) - he / him / his
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:10:06
OK, I've taken the meeting tag off that one. On to the next.
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:10:11
Hi Robby Callicotte
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:10:24
https://pagure.io/epel/issue/287
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:11:22
yeah, this seems ok from all the info I have right now...
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:11:23
I believe this has been discussed for a week ... 8 days actually, so we are good to vote on this one if we are comfortable with it.
<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>
18:11:42
fyi, on the clamav thing there are no held messages for epel-announce, so it's waiting on sergio to send that
<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>
18:12:53
the botan2 proposal seems to have done due diligence and makes sense to me
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:13:19
For the botan2, they seem to be more on top of things .... like Carl just said. I'm good with it as well.
<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>
18:13:30
+1 from me
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:13:35
+1
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:13:50
+1
<@pgreco:fedora.im>
18:13:52
My usual position wrt this is, it's not an automatic yes because we wanna know about it, and control a bit the outcome
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:14:07
+1
<@pgreco:fedora.im>
18:14:23
but if security is involved, being safe is more important than some annoyance
<@pgreco:fedora.im>
18:14:24
+1
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:14:43
yeah, the author was not aware of the incompatible process but follows it really well once it's pointed out
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:15:08
Pablo Greco: You are correct. Even if they did due diligance, but it really isn't needed, it's not an automatic +1.
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:15:28
But in this case, ya, I think it's needed.
<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>
18:15:48
there might be one wrinkle
<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>
18:16:06
i just noticed python3-botan2, it's archful but doesn't seem to link against the soname
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:16:28
oof
<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>
18:16:37
i'm going to temporarily hold my +1 till i look at this one closer to check if it needs to be part of the rebuild side tag
<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>
18:16:56
i would think it would either be archful and linked against the soname, or noarch
<@yselkowitz:fedora.im>
18:17:06
isn't that just a subpackage of botan2 though?
<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>
18:17:29
ohhh, indeed it is. false alarm.
<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>
18:17:39
still odd that it doesn't link against the soname
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:17:42
if it's a subpackage then I guess it will be rebuilt anyway, but asking the requester to make the subpackage noarch might be worthwhile
<@yselkowitz:fedora.im>
18:17:45
ctypes?
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:17:49
but it might be too annoying to fix
<@yselkowitz:fedora.im>
18:18:09
but there should be a hard dependency on botan2 = V-R
<@yselkowitz:fedora.im>
18:18:21
but fedora is also missing that
<@yselkowitz:fedora.im>
18:19:10
yeah, it uses ctypes
<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>
18:19:12
python3-botan2 only has a pure python file, and is incorrectly installed in sitearch instead of sitelib
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:19:42
Ya. I think for this incompatable update, it's good. Asking to change how they package it, I'd say should be beyond what we tell them here. Tell them more as a side comment in an email or something.
<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>
18:20:02
i'll file a separate bug for this, but it doesn't have to block the incompat (but honestly might as well fix it at the same time)
<@jonathanspw:fedora.im>
18:20:10
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:20:11
Jonathan Wright (jonathanspw)
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:20:16
Hi Jonathan Wright
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:20:23
right. preexisting issue
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:20:40
and I'm not sure it's the same packager anyway, though if they can follow up that's great
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:20:45
Ya, bugzilla sounds like the right course.
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:21:36
OK, so I have 5 +1's, and no -1 ... is that correct? Or does anyone want to vote that didn't yet.
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:22:04
Carl, nirik, Troy, me, Pablo... is that it?
<@davide:cavalca.name>
18:22:18
count me as +1 as well
<@jonathanspw:fedora.im>
18:22:29
I put my +1 in pagure ;)
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:22:45
Oh, that's right. I saw it, then forgot to count it.
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:23:03
OK, looks like we are +7 ...
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:24:04
!agreed Issue 287 (incompatible update: botan2 in epel8) passed. +1 (7) -1(0)
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:24:34
Does anyone volunteer to reply to the issue telling them it's passed?
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:25:26
I can do it. It will just have to wait until after this meeting.
<@yselkowitz:fedora.im>
18:25:38
I'll follow up on the technical issues along with a PR for the dependency, but not my place to speak for you all
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:26:07
I was engaging in that thread so I can follow up
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:26:15
Michel Lind 🎩: OK, thank you.
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:26:19
yselkowitz: should I reply first or do you want to do your follow up first?
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:26:27
(after the meeting, in any case. multitasking is bad)
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:26:35
Let's move on to the next issue
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:26:47
https://pagure.io/epel/issue/288
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:27:27
so this came up based on something Conan Kudo and I have been discussing recently - that the Python stack in EL9 is increasingly stale, and this will just keep happening in the future with future EL releases too
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:28:27
so we're wondering if we can come up with a solution to either, or both, ship parallel-installable alternate modules (e.g. newer setuptools), or make it easier to target multiple Python runtimes from the same spec (like it used to be during the py2/py3 migration but that was awful)
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:28:59
or rather, what we prefer here, then we can go ask the Python SIG. the current nuclear option is to just do python3XY-modname-epel and fork all the modules we want but that is... expensive
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:29:29
Do we know how/if we will have multiple pythons in RHEL10? And if so, how they are planning on doing it?
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:29:46
I don't think there's any simple answer here. ;(
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:29:58
Which also might be something to talk to the Python SIG about.
<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>
18:30:32
we've been down this road before, and i'm not particularly interested in going down it again
<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>
18:31:24
remember python3_other?
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:31:34
yeah... python sig (and the python EL maintainers, which happily overlap) really should give guidance, but I'd like to gauge what those of us here (since we're the ones who end up maintaining lots of packages in EPEL) would prefer...
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:31:34
- and what's realistically possible
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:31:34
- ideally
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:31:34
<@smooge:fedora.im>
18:31:38
I expect we will have multiple pythons with them getting upgraded every release cycle
<@jsteffan:fedora.im>
18:31:59
this has been a lot of work for small wins over the many years of trying to solve for this
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:32:01
fwiw I'm ok with just doing python3XY-modname-epel manually. that might even be faster than waiting on some maintainers who let bugs stall for weeks :)
<@smooge:fedora.im>
18:32:01
customers expect that there will be and things like AI will require frequent upgrades
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:32:16
right
<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>
18:32:33
what would python3XY-modname-epel even look like?
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:32:38
one of the use case I mentioned is ... data scientists (ok, full disclosure, Meta data scientists in this case) really want an updated conda stack
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:32:43
!hi
<@smooge:fedora.im>
18:32:45
so at least once a year until whatever version RHEL stops doing major changes in 10.8?
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:32:45
Neal Gompa (ngompa) - he / him / his
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:32:53
and Davide and I have been bashing our heads against getting dependencies built on the current Python stack
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:32:55
Hi Conan Kudo
<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>
18:32:58
other -epel packages are to ship unshipped things, not to provide a conflicting alternate version
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:33:09
please let's use `python3.Y-modname-epel` instead
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:33:11
Carl George: there's a draft for that, one sec. I've already been using it for epel8
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:33:29
err `3.X`
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:33:37
it matches the package convention for the interpreters now
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:33:57
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/Python3X
<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>
18:34:16
reminder that we've encoded in our published guidelines that -epel is for shipping unshipped things https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/epel/epel-policy-missing-sub-packages/#shared_guidelines
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:34:18
yeah, we can formalize this and make it python3.X for the future I think
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:34:29
ok, it does not need the -epel suffix then
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:34:43
Troy Dawson: there will be multiple pythons in RHEL 10 over time as parallel-installable stacks
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:34:49
I was just using this in the past since that seems the closest to formal - but I wonder why we never took this up and make it a real guideline
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:35:23
if we agree that pythonX.Y-modname is the recommended way, we can draft a guideline based on that wiki page and just modify the script it contains
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:35:43
and maybe suggest how to keep it up to date (I normally add a remote for the original package and merge in changes)
<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>
18:35:59
it's the standard way that rhel does it, but that doesn't solve your problem when you want a newer version of the mod itself, not the runtime
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:36:30
I wonder if with RHEL 10, we could take advantage of spec parts generators to generate the subpackages dynamically for various Python versions
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:37:22
that would make things less painful for maintenance
<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>
18:37:23
speaking as someone who ran a third party repo that provided alternate pythons and related libraries, we really want to stick with one set of mods per runtime. doing a matrix of combinations is a maintenance nightmare.
<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>
18:38:13
honestly i'd prefer we just stick with the runtimes that rhel offers and focus on building out the mod ecosystem around those, than making the problem worse with additional runtimes
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:38:47
I think that _is_ the point here?
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:38:56
we'd be using the interpreters shipped in RHEL
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:38:57
Neal said it's possible if you ship a wheel. I have not tried it though
<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>
18:39:08
i.e. in epel9 we work on adding python3 (3.9), python3.11, and python3.12 modules, rather than python3.13
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:39:14
I really really don't want to go down the wheel route
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:39:21
but yeah we need both issues addressed - how to ship against an alternate runtime, and how to ship an update that is parallel installable
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:39:34
right now we can ignore the parallel installation issue since we can just give up on python3.9
<@smooge:fedora.im>
18:39:43
can I have the floor on this for a second?
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:39:49
from my perspective, modules building on alternative stacks shipped in RHEL is the main thing to focus on
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:39:53
Stephen J Smoogen: sure
<@pgreco:fedora.im>
18:40:14
My flight is about to board, see you guys next week!
<@nhanlon:beeper.com>
18:40:23
safe travels
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:40:48
safe travels Pablo Greco
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:41:14
Note: I am going to timebox this in 5 minutes (45 after the hour). But I do want to hear Stephen J Smoogen
<@smooge:fedora.im>
18:41:22
Most of these problems stem from how I dealt with python in getting EPEL-8 out the door. The naming scheme for packages was not consistent and I did not set up clean rules on how we should do things. I think that it would be better to acknowledge that we will have multiple pythons and that python attached packages will need to be named and built against a specific version
<@smooge:fedora.im>
18:42:19
I think working from a point of view that any python is going to be python3.11-foobar and then a rebuild and update to python3.12-foobar etc would make it clearer what work is needed and how to do it
<@smooge:fedora.im>
18:43:06
but I would also say that whatever Miro says would work best would be the best solution long term
<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>
18:43:16
this seems like a much bigger discussion than we can wrap up in 5 minutes, so we might as well call it and move it to the main channel, the issue, and/or the mailing list/discourse
<@smooge:fedora.im>
18:43:20
I should have listened and worked with him back then]
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:43:22
this comes back to needing to make multipython easier for python module packages
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:43:22
one problem is ... we want to be able to reuse Fedora specs right
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:43:44
so having python modules targeting the default runtime be python-modname, but having a standard convention for those targeting alternate stacks, would be nice
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:43:56
we can discuss that with the Python folks and move on
<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>
18:44:12
one spec file for multiple python runtimes is a mess, and locks you into keeping the same version instead of choosing an appropriate version for each
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:44:19
reusing the spec will be nice in the future, but agreeing what the src / binary RPMs should be called first is probably best
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:44:20
yeah
<@smooge:fedora.im>
18:44:35
honestly I dont think we can reuse Fedora specs for any of the language environments
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:44:36
yup
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:44:46
I think a recommended way to keep the different modules for different runtimes in sync - if possible / desired - would be nice. but sometimes yo ucan't
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:45:00
e.g. when you can no longer target an older runtime because <issues> and need a separate spec anyway
<@smooge:fedora.im>
18:45:09
we can use them as a template but too much is needed to make go/python work
<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>
18:45:15
after the meeting i'll pick Michel Lind 🎩 's brain about the specific rough edges he's trying to solve for
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:45:20
Michel Lind 🎩: Thank you for bringing this subject up. I'm pretty sure we can come to a good solution. But it's time to move on.
<@smooge:fedora.im>
18:45:23
i am over
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:45:35
!topic Old Business
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:45:41
so yeah let's not focus on that. that's why I like that wiki page - it does automatic conversion. but I'll document how you can merge in changes. anyway, moving on
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:45:59
Do we have any Old Business? Or should I just move on to Open Floor?
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:46:15
Oh wait ... I skipped EPEL 10 ...
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:46:25
!topic EPEL 10
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:46:43
Do we have any epel10 business?
<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>
18:47:02
i think we talked about this before so i'll call it old business, got a pr up for dropping epel7 and epel8-next from the docs https://pagure.io/epel/pull-request/286
<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>
18:47:12
!link https://pagure.io/epel/pull-request/286
<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>
18:47:40
no updates on epel10 this week
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:47:49
yeah, I worked with Carl to try and finish off the epel7/epel8-next retirement stuff too...
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:48:05
We still need to sort mirrormanager and then finally delete the existing stuff from not archive.
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:48:38
Very nice. Thank you both.
<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>
18:48:46
anyone else have suggested tweaks for that docs pr? or want more time to look over it?
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:49:15
lgtm
<@jonathanspw:fedora.im>
18:49:21
What's the latest plans for epel10 at flock? Will it be a packaging hackathon or will things not be ready yet?
<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>
18:49:25
it's only been open for a few days but if no one else plans to review i'm happy to merge now
<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>
18:49:52
won't know until then, show up anyways
<@rcallicotte:fedora.im>
18:50:33
I saw it on the schedule
<@jonathanspw:fedora.im>
18:50:47
well of course i'll show up anyway :p
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:50:48
On the CentOS Stream front, things are becoming more stable. But at the same time, due to an anaconda / pykickstart update, we won't have qcow2 images for another week.
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:51:13
But we will still have composes, so it won't affect epel10
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:51:54
!topic General Issues / Open Floor
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:52:11
Does anyone have anything for Open Floor?
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:52:30
(Or old business, or epel10)
<@smooge:fedora.im>
18:52:37
not from me
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:53:07
Wow, it got quiet.
<@rcallicotte:fedora.im>
18:53:15
:)
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:53:30
Well, it's almost time anyway, so let's go a few minutes early.
<@smooge:fedora.im>
18:53:40
thanks troy
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:53:54
Thank you all for coming, and for the very good discussions.
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:54:00
neil has already given cookies to tdawson during the F40 timeframe
<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>
18:54:04
one more meeting before flock
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:54:12
And, as always, thank you very much for all you do for EPEL and it's community.
<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>
18:54:14
should we cancel the one that happens during flock, aug 7th?
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:54:32
Talk to you next week, and then ya ... talk to some of you in person the week after. :)
<@rcallicotte:fedora.im>
18:54:53
I vote +1 to cancel aug7 meeting
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:55:04
yes, please
<@nhanlon:beeper.com>
18:55:10
yeah +1
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:55:10
I vote to cancel, we have the hackfest anyway
<@davide:cavalca.name>
18:55:14
Yeah, good idea
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:55:20
I guess we can also cancel it next week but why not do it now :)(
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:55:20
Yep, I'm for canceling Aug7th.
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:55:38
+1
<@yselkowitz:fedora.im>
18:55:45
office hours too I suppose?
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:55:54
probably yeah
<@jonathanspw:fedora.im>
18:55:56
+1 to cancel
<@rcallicotte:fedora.im>
18:56:06
yes to office hours too
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:56:13
Oh ya ... +1 to cancel both Office Hours and weekly meeting.
<@rcallicotte:fedora.im>
18:56:42
I guess everyone that usually attends office hours will be in the hackathon...
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:57:14
oh office hour too
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:57:16
yeah +1
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:57:22
Anyone against canceling them?
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:57:36
if we can find a room we can host it so people like Diego can show up I guess :)
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:57:46
but that sounds like it will be difficult logistically
<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>
18:58:09
yeah not worth the effort
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:58:37
!agreed We will cancel both the weekly meeting, and the Office hours on Aug. 7, due to Flock. Voting was unanimous in favor.
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:59:06
It's in the logs now. No backing out.
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
18:59:48
I already said my usual closing stuff .... so ... closing the meeting in 25 seconds.
<@rcallicotte:fedora.im>
19:00:05
bye everyone. Thanks Troy
<@salimma:fedora.im>
19:00:12
Thanks Troy!
<@tdawson:fedora.im>
19:00:32
!endmeeting