2025-04-02 18:00:24 <@tdawson:fedora.im> !startmeeting EPEL (2025-04-2)
2025-04-02 18:00:31 <@meetbot:fedora.im> Meeting started at 2025-04-02 18:00:24 UTC
2025-04-02 18:00:31 <@meetbot:fedora.im> The Meeting name is 'EPEL (2025-04-2)'
2025-04-02 18:00:31 <@tdawson:fedora.im> !meetingname epel
2025-04-02 18:00:31 <@tdawson:fedora.im> !topic aloha
2025-04-02 18:00:39 <@meetbot:fedora.im> The Meeting Name is now epel
2025-04-02 18:00:58 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> !hi
2025-04-02 18:01:00 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Neil Hanlon (neil) - he / him / his
2025-04-02 18:01:00 <@salimma:fedora.im> !hi
2025-04-02 18:01:03 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Michel Lind (salimma) - he / him / his
2025-04-02 18:01:07 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> !hi
2025-04-02 18:01:09 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Neal Gompa (ngompa) - he / him / his
2025-04-02 18:01:12 <@dherrera:fedora.im> !hi
2025-04-02 18:01:13 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Diego Herrera (dherrera) - he / him / his
2025-04-02 18:01:19 <@dgomez:fedora.im> !hi
2025-04-02 18:01:20 <@zodbot:fedora.im> David Gomez (dgomez)
2025-04-02 18:01:21 <@davide:cavalca.name> !hi
2025-04-02 18:01:22 <@elguero:fedora.im> !hi
2025-04-02 18:01:23 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Davide Cavalca (dcavalca) - he / him / his
2025-04-02 18:01:23 <@rcallicotte:fedora.im> !hi
2025-04-02 18:01:23 <@jonathanspw:fedora.im> !hi
2025-04-02 18:01:24 <@zodbot:fedora.im> None (elguero)
2025-04-02 18:01:25 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Robby Callicotte (rcallicotte) - he / him / his
2025-04-02 18:01:25 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Jonathan Wright (jonathanspw)
2025-04-02 18:02:04 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> !hi
2025-04-02 18:02:05 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Carl George (carlwgeorge) - he / him / his
2025-04-02 18:02:54 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Hi Neil Hanlon Conan Kudo Michael L. Young Michel Lind UTC-6 David Gomez Davide Cavalca Robby Callicotte Jonathan Wright and Carl George 
2025-04-02 18:03:35 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Wow, everyone joined in the first minute ... makes my saying Hi back a bit longer this week. :)
2025-04-02 18:04:06 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> efficient!
2025-04-02 18:04:19 <@tdawson:fedora.im> David Gomez: and Michael L. Young , we don't usually see you.  Are you here for a specific reason or just to be here?
2025-04-02 18:04:28 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> morning
2025-04-02 18:04:49 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Morning nirik 
2025-04-02 18:05:37 <@elguero:fedora.im> Here to be here and hopefully participate at some point.
2025-04-02 18:06:01 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> Some new ~~victims~~ contributors I'm hoping to onboard 😃
2025-04-02 18:06:29 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Michael L. Young: Sounds good.  You are always welcome.
2025-04-02 18:06:42 <@dgomez:fedora.im> Same as Michael :) 
2025-04-02 18:06:47 <@elguero:fedora.im> Troy Dawson: Thank you!!
2025-04-02 18:07:01 <@tdawson:fedora.im> !link https://pagure.io/epel/issues?tags=meeting&status=Open
2025-04-02 18:07:01 <@tdawson:fedora.im> !topic EPEL Issues https://pagure.io/epel/issues
2025-04-02 18:07:57 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Sorry for the delay, pagure is being slow for me today.
2025-04-02 18:08:09 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> it's been on the struggle bus for a few weeks now
2025-04-02 18:08:21 <@rcallicotte:fedora.im> AI scrapers most likely
2025-04-02 18:08:26 <@tdawson:fedora.im> !epel 324
2025-04-02 18:08:28 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Assignee:** carlwgeorge
2025-04-02 18:08:28 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Last Updated:** 9 minutes ago
2025-04-02 18:08:28 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Opened:** 2 weeks ago by carlwgeorge
2025-04-02 18:08:28 <@zodbot:fedora.im> **epel #324** (https://pagure.io/epel/issue/324):**EPEL 10 minor version upgrade path**
2025-04-02 18:08:28 <@zodbot:fedora.im> 
2025-04-02 18:08:58 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Well, I know we have 324 marked for the meeting, so I'll just go for that first.
2025-04-02 18:09:22 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> we discussed this a bit in the office hours, but i'll give a summary for those that missed it
2025-04-02 18:10:50 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> our current epel10 structure is expected to cause upgrade problems going between rhel minor versions (e.g. rhel 10.0 to 10.1).  it also will put a bit of strain on the mock and packit maintainers.
2025-04-02 18:11:06 <@tdawson:fedora.im> And copr
2025-04-02 18:11:20 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> yup, that too (those folks are on the same team)
2025-04-02 18:11:41 <@tdawson:fedora.im> And potentially others that might have to change setting each release, when they haven't in the past.
2025-04-02 18:11:51 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> this issue is my attempt to come up with a plan to adjust the epel-release and mirrormanager structure to solve these problems
2025-04-02 18:11:57 <@tdawson:fedora.im> OK, I'll shut up and let you talk. :)
2025-04-02 18:13:58 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> generally the feedback i've gotten so far is these changes seem complicated, so option 1 is we do nothing and keep the current structure.  we'd want to document that to upgrade between minor versions you can do a two step upgrade (`dnf -y update redhat-release && dnf -y update`) or manually set releasever to the next minor to work around dep resolution problems every six months (`dnf -y --releasever 10.1 update`).
2025-04-02 18:14:36 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> the drawbacks to that are 1) breaking dnf-automatic and 2) most people don't read the docs
2025-04-02 18:14:40 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> or dnf update; dnf update right? (if there's nothing that breaks the first one)
2025-04-02 18:15:24 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> right, that would work if you don't have dep problems.  like if you just have htop installed, it would probably work.  if you have plasma, you'll likely have problems.
2025-04-02 18:17:16 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> option 2 is we do this plan i described in the issue, or something similar
2025-04-02 18:19:16 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> so does anyone have any questions, or is this ready for a vote?
2025-04-02 18:19:57 <@tdawson:fedora.im> The vote would be for option 1 or 2 correct, and we'd settle the details at a later date?
2025-04-02 18:20:27 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> well the details are pretty well established in that issue, unless people want to bikeshed on the `-z` string
2025-04-02 18:20:59 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> i guess you could split it into a vote of "do nothing" vs "do something", then vote on this specific plan
2025-04-02 18:21:28 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Please, no bikeshedding today (at this meeting) ... I think no matter what is chosen, someone will disagree ... I'd prefer we do a vote to know what direction to go.
2025-04-02 18:21:46 <@tdawson:fedora.im> And then bikeshed after we know the direction.
2025-04-02 18:21:52 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> IMO the mirrormanager redirect plan makes sense and it seems like a good use of that feature. Confusing? Perhaps a bit. But the tradeoff I think is a worse UX
2025-04-02 18:21:54 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> you can blame me, i only finished writing it up last night
2025-04-02 18:22:12 <@davide:cavalca.name> My understanding is this for the most part only impacts rhel. Can clarify the expected impact for centos stream users?
2025-04-02 18:22:21 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> indeed, for maintainers and users nothing should change, install epel-release and then install packages
2025-04-02 18:22:25 <@davide:cavalca.name> My understanding is this for the most part only impacts rhel. Can you clarify the expected impact for centos stream users?
2025-04-02 18:22:28 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> and +1 to @Conan Kudo 's in-thread request for symlink directories
2025-04-02 18:22:56 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> and +1 to @Conan Kudo 's in-issue request for symlink directories
2025-04-02 18:23:40 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> should be no impact at all, they will keep requesting the `epel-10` repo from mirrormanager
2025-04-02 18:23:59 <@tdawson:fedora.im> nirik: We could delay for another week if you feel it is needed.  Jonathan Wright  isn't here either, although I believe he's made it clear which way he wants to go.
2025-04-02 18:24:12 <@jonathanspw:fedora.im> I'm here ^
2025-04-02 18:24:25 <@davide:cavalca.name> Thanks, that's what I wanted to hear :)
2025-04-02 18:24:31 <@jonathanspw:fedora.im> I said !hi earlier :)  Yes I feel like my views are known on it so I've had nothing else to add thus far.
2025-04-02 18:24:40 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Ha! .... so many people came in at once, I lost track. :)
2025-04-02 18:25:08 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> I'm good with the carl plan
2025-04-02 18:25:12 <@smooge:fedora.im> its ok we like to sneak in that way
2025-04-02 18:25:39 <@salimma:fedora.im> at this point I think I can just say we trust Carl enough and should not micromanage the details
2025-04-02 18:25:54 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> my understanding is that view is firmly "do something", and probably fine with whatever the implementation is?
2025-04-02 18:25:55 <@rcallicotte:fedora.im> Agreed
2025-04-02 18:26:10 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> no need to delay for me. I think the plan is sound, just haven't looked at the exact details, but that can be tweaked when implementing.
2025-04-02 18:26:19 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> yup
2025-04-02 18:26:21 <@davide:cavalca.name> I'm ok with the proposed plan in the ticket 
2025-04-02 18:26:39 <@jonathanspw:fedora.im> My view is option 2, I guess - don't require 2 updates, don't hurt UX.  That's the tl;dr of it.
2025-04-02 18:26:55 <@tdawson:fedora.im> OK, then let's do a vote.   I guess instead of +1 or -1, we do 1 or 2  
2025-04-02 18:27:10 <@salimma:fedora.im> sorry, what are the options?
2025-04-02 18:27:12 <@jonathanspw:fedora.im> Can you define what option 1 and 2 mean, for clarity.
2025-04-02 18:27:15 <@jonathanspw:fedora.im> Can you define what option 1 and 2 mean, for clarity?
2025-04-02 18:27:27 <@tdawson:fedora.im> 1 - do not change, but document things   2 - Carl's proposal in issue 324
2025-04-02 18:27:36 <@salimma:fedora.im> (I have an aversion to opening pagure during meetings nowadays)
2025-04-02 18:27:43 <@salimma:fedora.im> ok, option 2
2025-04-02 18:27:48 <@jonathanspw:fedora.im> option 2
2025-04-02 18:27:49 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> we could keep it simple and say a -1 is do nothing, and +1 is do the ticket plan
2025-04-02 18:27:54 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> option 2
2025-04-02 18:28:09 <@davide:cavalca.name> option 2
2025-04-02 18:28:50 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> option 2 seems reasonable
2025-04-02 18:29:00 <@tdawson:fedora.im> option 2 
2025-04-02 18:30:08 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Carl George: I know it's your proposal, but you've also said you could go either way ... are you still on the fence?
2025-04-02 18:30:26 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> i lean towards the plan in the ticket, option 2
2025-04-02 18:31:47 <@tdawson:fedora.im> !agreed - Proposal in epel issue 324 has been agreed upon the path forward.  7 for it, 0 against it
2025-04-02 18:32:01 <@tdawson:fedora.im> !agreed - Proposal in epel issue 324 has been agreed upon as the path forward.  7 for it, 0 against it
2025-04-02 18:32:16 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> cool, i'll get with releng to start the implementation
2025-04-02 18:32:23 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Sounds good.
2025-04-02 18:32:30 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Anything else before we move on?
2025-04-02 18:33:06 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> nope, let's go
2025-04-02 18:33:48 <@tdawson:fedora.im> !topic EPEL 10
2025-04-02 18:34:03 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Beyond what we just talked about, are there any other EPEL 10 issues that need to come up?
2025-04-02 18:34:31 <@tdawson:fedora.im> And ... should we keep this in the agenda?  Or are we past it.
2025-04-02 18:34:59 <@jonathanspw:fedora.im> Barring any technical difficulties Carl George runs into with the proposal in the ticket it sounds like we're past it.
2025-04-02 18:35:23 <@tdawson:fedora.im> I agree, I'll take it out of the agenda.
2025-04-02 18:35:29 <@tdawson:fedora.im> !topic Old Business
2025-04-02 18:35:53 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Is there any old business that needs to come up?
2025-04-02 18:36:14 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> how about the selinux thing?
2025-04-02 18:36:46 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2025-ee3ba0de35
2025-04-02 18:36:46 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Which part of it?
2025-04-02 18:37:29 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> mainly an update about when that is going stable (tied to the main selinux-policy getting published i think), and also how we're going to tag it forward
2025-04-02 18:38:04 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> note that the Recommends will not work
2025-04-02 18:38:20 <@tdawson:fedora.im> That's true ... we hadn't brought up the selinux stuff, but linking the epel-release to "latest" is an older business.
2025-04-02 18:39:02 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> Recommends does not work because the initial install will not satisfy the dependency, and DNF will automatically exclude the Recommends going forward because it assumes that you don't want it
2025-04-02 18:39:21 <@tdawson:fedora.im> So, it's not really that recommends doesn't work, it's that selinux-policy-epel has a "Conflicts: selinux-policy <= (what's currently released)"
2025-04-02 18:40:05 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> i will point out these are two separate scenarios, initial install vs upgrading epel-release
2025-04-02 18:42:16 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Well, until selinux-policy get's updated (at it is at least one more week), selinux-policy-epel can't be installed.
2025-04-02 18:42:35 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Anyway, Carl, what did you want to discuss about the package?
2025-04-02 18:42:59 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> i wanted to bring up the tagging dance we'll need to do
2025-04-02 18:43:05 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> !link https://pagure.io/epel/issue/318
2025-04-02 18:44:18 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> the script that creates the latest symlink was recreating it every minute, for the epel-release in 10.0 and 10.1, causing 404s for users.  we adjusted the script to not replace the symlink if the filename is the same.
2025-04-02 18:45:14 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> but for epel-release updates going forward, if we update in two minor versions, we get two different file names, and then will have the symlink churn problem again.  so until we improve the logic in that script, what we need to do is build for the oldest minor and then tag it for the newer minor manually.
2025-04-02 18:45:54 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> i certainly don't want to make this a standard workflow for any package, but i'm ok with this as an exception process for epel-release, at least for now
2025-04-02 18:46:35 <@tdawson:fedora.im> I think "For now" is the right phrase.   At some point, the two might diverge, although I hope not.
2025-04-02 18:47:00 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> yeah i would like for the latest url be the same for everyone
2025-04-02 18:47:11 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> hopefully the script could be adjusted before it becomes needed?
2025-04-02 18:47:58 <@tdawson:fedora.im> But thank you for pointing it out.  I believe everyone that is owner of that package is in this meeting.   Please remember to just build for the oldest, and get that one tagged into both tags.
2025-04-02 18:48:15 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> relevant code that would need adjustment https://pagure.io/fedora-infra/ansible/blob/main/f/roles/bodhi2/backend/files/new-updates-sync#_471-527
2025-04-02 18:48:46 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> ideal scenario is we change that code to create the latest symlink only for the oldest minor version
2025-04-02 18:49:34 <@tdawson:fedora.im> I have an item for Open Floor ... are we done, or do we need more discussion?
2025-04-02 18:50:10 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> good here, this was just an awareness item
2025-04-02 18:50:15 <@tdawson:fedora.im> !topic General Issues / Open Floor
2025-04-02 18:50:45 <@salimma:fedora.im> I have one thing
2025-04-02 18:50:46 <@tdawson:fedora.im> This is also, sorta for awareness.  The Fedora Spring Election is coming up, thus we have our Elections.
2025-04-02 18:51:19 <@salimma:fedora.im> I'll go after Troy
2025-04-02 18:52:44 <@tdawson:fedora.im> I don't have the link, and I should have, but I believe Carl, Me, Nirik, and Jonathan did elections last year.  So I think it's Michel, Neal, and Davide this year, plus anyone else who wants to run.  But there will only be 3 people elected.
2025-04-02 18:53:07 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Again, just for awareness, and with that, I'll pass it to Michel Lind UTC-6 
2025-04-02 18:53:08 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> oof
2025-04-02 18:53:08 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> !link https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/fedora-linux-40-election-results/
2025-04-02 18:53:11 <@salimma:fedora.im> so if people want they can wipe out all the Hyperscale people :P
2025-04-02 18:53:19 <@salimma:fedora.im> !link https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/?search=10-4&packages=epel-rpm-macros&status=pending&status=testing
2025-04-02 18:53:29 <@salimma:fedora.im> this papers over the cmake %ctest macro issue that affects epel10
2025-04-02 18:53:55 <@salimma:fedora.im> tl;dr `%ctest -- ...` will just break. I filed an MR for c10s too and the link is in the macro file
2025-04-02 18:54:14 <@salimma:fedora.im> I'm done, Carl George ?
2025-04-02 18:54:34 <@tdawson:fedora.im> I thin it was nirik that had something.
2025-04-02 18:54:39 <@salimma:fedora.im> oh yeah, sorry
2025-04-02 18:54:47 <@tdawson:fedora.im> I think it was nirik that had something.
2025-04-02 18:54:53 <@tdawson:fedora.im> nirik: Go for it.
2025-04-02 18:55:02 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> just a sec.
2025-04-02 18:55:36 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> https://pagure.io/epel/issue/325
2025-04-02 18:56:51 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> dew it
2025-04-02 18:56:54 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> seems fine to me
2025-04-02 18:57:01 <@salimma:fedora.im> yes please
2025-04-02 18:57:29 <@rcallicotte:fedora.im> agree
2025-04-02 18:57:35 <@salimma:fedora.im> is it being submitted to Stream too?
2025-04-02 18:57:41 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> do we also need to backport the %arm32 and %arm64 macros too?
2025-04-02 18:58:19 <@salimma:fedora.im> (to redhat-rpm-config I mean)
2025-04-02 18:59:10 <@salimma:fedora.im> (ah for clarity I think it's missing from epel9)
2025-04-02 18:59:17 <@salimma:fedora.im> (ah for clarity I think it's missing from stream )
2025-04-02 18:59:28 <@salimma:fedora.im> (ah for clarity I think it's missing from stream 9 - so I think no, it won't happen)
2025-04-02 18:59:43 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Looks like our time is up.
2025-04-02 19:00:00 <@zodbot:fedora.im> salimma has already given cookies to tdawson during the F41 timeframe
2025-04-02 19:00:11 <@zodbot:fedora.im> rcallicotte gave a cookie to tdawson. They now have 84 cookies, 7 of which were obtained in the Fedora 41 release cycle
2025-04-02 19:00:21 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Thank you all for the good discussions, and for the decisions.  It will help us move forward.
2025-04-02 19:00:24 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ngompa has already given cookies to tdawson during the F41 timeframe
2025-04-02 19:00:30 <@tdawson:fedora.im> And thank you all for all you for for EPEL and it's community.
2025-04-02 19:00:30 <@zodbot:fedora.im> dgomez gave a cookie to tdawson. They now have 85 cookies, 8 of which were obtained in the Fedora 41 release cycle
2025-04-02 19:00:39 <@tdawson:fedora.im> I'll talk to you next week, if not sooner.
2025-04-02 19:00:40 <@zodbot:fedora.im> neil has already given cookies to tdawson during the F41 timeframe
2025-04-02 19:00:46 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> Thanks for running, Troy!
2025-04-02 19:01:12 <@tdawson:fedora.im> !endmeeting