2025-07-23 17:59:50 <@tdawson:fedora.im> !startmeeting EPEL (2025-07-23)
2025-07-23 17:59:52 <@meetbot:fedora.im> Meeting started at 2025-07-23 17:59:50 UTC
2025-07-23 17:59:52 <@meetbot:fedora.im> The Meeting name is 'EPEL (2025-07-23)'
2025-07-23 17:59:57 <@jonathanspw:fedora.im> !hi
2025-07-23 17:59:58 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Jonathan Wright (jonathanspw)
2025-07-23 17:59:59 <@tdawson:fedora.im> !startmeeting EPEL (2025-07-23)
2025-07-23 17:59:59 <@meetbot:fedora.im> Meeting already in progress
2025-07-23 18:00:11 <@tdawson:fedora.im> !meetingname epel
2025-07-23 18:00:11 <@tdawson:fedora.im> !topic aloha
2025-07-23 18:00:11 <@meetbot:fedora.im> The Meeting Name is now epel
2025-07-23 18:00:20 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Hi Jonathan Wright 
2025-07-23 18:00:24 <@jonathanspw:fedora.im> howdy!
2025-07-23 18:03:13 <@jonathanspw:fedora.im> Wonder where everyone is today
2025-07-23 18:03:21 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Hmm ... I hope it's more than just us.
2025-07-23 18:03:38 <@tdawson:fedora.im> I don't know of any conference going on today.
2025-07-23 18:03:43 <@jonathanspw:fedora.im> I've talked to both Neal and Carl within the past hour
2025-07-23 18:03:48 <@elguero:fedora.im> !hi
2025-07-23 18:03:49 <@zodbot:fedora.im> None (elguero)
2025-07-23 18:03:49 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> !hi
2025-07-23 18:03:50 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Carl George (carlwgeorge) - he / him / his
2025-07-23 18:03:53 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> morning
2025-07-23 18:04:02 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Hi Michael L. Young and Carl George 
2025-07-23 18:04:06 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Morning nirik 
2025-07-23 18:05:05 <@tdawson:fedora.im> I believe 4 committee members should be enough for votes ... so let's proceed.
2025-07-23 18:05:21 <@tdawson:fedora.im> !link https://pagure.io/epel/issues?tags=meeting&status=Open
2025-07-23 18:05:21 <@tdawson:fedora.im> !topic EPEL Issues https://pagure.io/epel/issues
2025-07-23 18:05:39 <@tdawson:fedora.im> We do have one item to discuss / vote on this week.
2025-07-23 18:05:50 <@tdawson:fedora.im> !epel 341
2025-07-23 18:05:51 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Last Updated:** a week ago
2025-07-23 18:05:51 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Opened:** a week ago by jonathanspw
2025-07-23 18:05:51 <@zodbot:fedora.im> **epel #341** (https://pagure.io/epel/issue/341):**Incompatible upgrade in EPEL9: netplan**
2025-07-23 18:05:51 <@zodbot:fedora.im> 
2025-07-23 18:05:51 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Assignee:** Not Assigned
2025-07-23 18:06:31 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> so this update does have breaking changes, but since nothing else in epel depends on it i'm +1
2025-07-23 18:06:34 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I must have missed this one... but it seems like it might be ok...
2025-07-23 18:06:39 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> +1 here
2025-07-23 18:07:08 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Yep, there was a little discussion last week, and nobody had any negatives, mainly due to nothing in EPEL depending on it.
2025-07-23 18:07:41 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> being a leaf package certainly makes it easier
2025-07-23 18:07:41 <@tdawson:fedora.im> I'm a +1 as well.
2025-07-23 18:07:49 <@jonathanspw:fedora.im> I'll abstain since it's my request
2025-07-23 18:08:12 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Well ... that only gives us +3 ... let me double check ...
2025-07-23 18:08:41 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> yeah i don't think we have a requirement to abstain from your own changes.  not a bad idea, but then we need a fourth vote
2025-07-23 18:08:59 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> at the very least, we haven't required abstaining for past stuff
2025-07-23 18:09:05 <@elguero:fedora.im> Am I allowed to vote?  I will give it a +1
2025-07-23 18:09:11 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> o/
2025-07-23 18:09:12 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> !hi
2025-07-23 18:09:13 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Neil Hanlon (neil) - he / him / his
2025-07-23 18:09:19 <@jonathanspw:fedora.im> Well I'll +1 if it's a matter of a delayed vote :p
2025-07-23 18:09:35 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> heh
2025-07-23 18:09:41 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Hi Neil Hanlon 
2025-07-23 18:09:47 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> !hi
2025-07-23 18:09:48 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Neal Gompa (ngompa) - he / him / his
2025-07-23 18:09:53 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> +1
2025-07-23 18:09:55 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Hi Conan Kudo 
2025-07-23 18:10:06 <@salimma:fedora.im> !hi
2025-07-23 18:10:07 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Michel Lind (salimma) - he / him / his
2025-07-23 18:10:10 <@jonathanspw:fedora.im> Ok there's another vote, let's keep me as abstained
2025-07-23 18:10:14 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> every is welcome to weigh in, but the binding votes are the steering committee members
2025-07-23 18:10:16 <@salimma:fedora.im> phew I'm not the only one who's running late
2025-07-23 18:10:27 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> everyone is welcome to weigh in, but the binding votes are the steering committee members
2025-07-23 18:10:37 <@elguero:fedora.im> Cool. That is what I thought. Was just checking.
2025-07-23 18:10:41 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> just came out of another meeting :)
2025-07-23 18:10:53 <@elguero:fedora.im> I am still new around these parts 😀
2025-07-23 18:11:24 <@salimma:fedora.im> not a SC member anymore but community +1 - a) nothing uses it in EPEL (but others might so please give a heads up as usual) and b) upstream finally went to v1 so seems like carrying a .0 for many years down the road is worse
2025-07-23 18:11:32 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> no worries!
2025-07-23 18:11:46 <@tdawson:fedora.im> !agreed Passed: Incompatible upgrade in EPEL9: netplan #341 - 4(+1) - 0(-1) - 1 abstained.
2025-07-23 18:12:06 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Thanks all
2025-07-23 18:12:23 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Does someone mind updating the ticket.
2025-07-23 18:12:42 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> i can
2025-07-23 18:12:47 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Thanks
2025-07-23 18:14:03 <@tdawson:fedora.im> We still have that one pull request marked as meeting.
2025-07-23 18:14:14 <@tdawson:fedora.im> https://pagure.io/epel/pull-request/339
2025-07-23 18:14:46 <@tdawson:fedora.im> I realized I didn't put my summary in that ticket.
2025-07-23 18:14:48 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Please file a separate bug for different EPEL major versions.
2025-07-23 18:14:48 <@tdawson:fedora.im> For EPEL 8 and 9 you just need to file a bug for the major versions.
2025-07-23 18:14:48 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Starting from EPEL 10, EPEL x tracks CentOS Stream, which will become the next RHEL minor release, e.g. if RHEL 10.0 is already branched or released, EPEL 10 targets RHEL 10.1.   See branching for more details. So if you want your package built on all current releases, you will need to request it for all current branches.  This request can be in the same bug requestion.
2025-07-23 18:14:48 <@tdawson:fedora.im> 
2025-07-23 18:15:12 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> yeah that's where we left off
2025-07-23 18:15:42 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Looking at it, that one sentance is too long, especially if we are saying "look here for more info" ... how about ..
2025-07-23 18:16:01 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Starting from EPEL 10, EPEL x tracks CentOS Stream, which will become the next RHEL minor release.   See branching for more details. So if you want your package built on all current releases, you will need to request it for all current branches.  This request can be in the same bug requestion.
2025-07-23 18:16:43 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> still pretty long.
2025-07-23 18:16:55 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Starting from EPEL 10, EPEL x tracks CentOS Stream, which will become the next RHEL minor release.   See branching for more details. So if you want your package built on all current releases, you will need to request it for all current branches.  This request can be in the same bug request.
2025-07-23 18:17:11 <@rcallicotte:fedora.im> !hi
2025-07-23 18:17:13 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Robby Callicotte (rcallicotte) - he / him / his
2025-07-23 18:17:22 <@rcallicotte:fedora.im> sorry for being late :/
2025-07-23 18:17:33 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Hi Robby Callicotte 
2025-07-23 18:17:43 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> we can probably leave most of those details for the branches page, and just mention the most important missing part, that one request can be used for multiple minor versions
2025-07-23 18:19:31 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Starting from EPEL 10, you will need to request for all current branches.  This request can be in the same bug request.
2025-07-23 18:19:31 <@tdawson:fedora.im> 
2025-07-23 18:19:50 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> this is for the user filing the request right?
2025-07-23 18:20:01 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Correct
2025-07-23 18:20:27 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> For EPEL10, be sure and note what RHEL minor version or CentOS stream you are requesting for.
2025-07-23 18:20:35 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> ?
2025-07-23 18:22:22 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> or something like that?
2025-07-23 18:23:04 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> yeah, that but i would just say "which EPEL minor versions" in the middle
2025-07-23 18:23:58 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Please file a separate bug for different EPEL major versions.
2025-07-23 18:23:58 <@tdawson:fedora.im> For EPEL 8 and 9 you just need to file a bug for the major versions.
2025-07-23 18:23:58 <@tdawson:fedora.im> For EPEL10, be sure and note which EPEL minor versions you are requesting for.
2025-07-23 18:24:41 <@rcallicotte:fedora.im> sounds good to me
2025-07-23 18:24:47 <@davide:cavalca.name> !hi
2025-07-23 18:24:48 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Davide Cavalca (dcavalca) - he / him / his
2025-07-23 18:24:52 <@davide:cavalca.name> sorry, got tied up at work
2025-07-23 18:24:55 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> (EPEL minor versions track RHEL minor versions with the newest tracking CentOS stream) ? (or just a link to the doc I guess)
2025-07-23 18:24:56 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Hi Davide Cavalca 
2025-07-23 18:25:28 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Ya, I was thinking "which EPEL minor versions" would be a link the the branches doc.
2025-07-23 18:26:00 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> exactly
2025-07-23 18:26:22 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> this looks good to me, throw it in a pr comment and see if the submitter agrees
2025-07-23 18:26:35 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Sounds good.
2025-07-23 18:26:52 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> the only other question would be where in the doc it makes the most sense, and which admonition type (note, warning, etc)
2025-07-23 18:27:16 <@rcallicotte:fedora.im> I think "note" but that doesn't pop enough visually
2025-07-23 18:27:42 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> my concern is we have two notes already for the two different product methods that might be needed
2025-07-23 18:28:25 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> i'm thinking important just to differ from the two notes, and at the top of the "file a bug" section
2025-07-23 18:28:41 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> i can comment with that in the pr after troy leaves his comment
2025-07-23 18:29:30 <@tdawson:fedora.im> OK, I'll left my comment.
2025-07-23 18:30:52 <@tdawson:fedora.im> I think we're done with the two issues / pr marked as "meeting" ... moving on.
2025-07-23 18:31:08 <@tdawson:fedora.im> 
2025-07-23 18:31:08 <@tdawson:fedora.im> !topic Old Business
2025-07-23 18:31:24 <@salimma:fedora.im> Stephen J Smoogen: it's your turn :)
2025-07-23 18:32:25 <@tdawson:fedora.im> I'm pretty sure Stephen J Smoogen has forgotten more things than I've ever learned.
2025-07-23 18:32:44 <@tdawson:fedora.im> But, does anyone else have any old business they want to bring up?
2025-07-23 18:33:03 <@salimma:fedora.im> I thought I did... /ducks
2025-07-23 18:33:13 <@salimma:fedora.im> PSA: showcase is next Monday
2025-07-23 18:33:34 <@salimma:fedora.im> I think Shaun sent all the confirmation requests out, but IDK about y'all I could not get the time picker to work
2025-07-23 18:33:38 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> i have an epel talk approved
2025-07-23 18:33:53 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> "EPEL 10 for the Discerning Packager"
2025-07-23 18:33:59 <@rcallicotte:fedora.im> cool
2025-07-23 18:34:27 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> still working on the slides, but i'm thinking of a quick walkthrough of the workflow for maintainers that are out of the loop
2025-07-23 18:35:03 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Mine presentation is mainly a demo ... I'm not even sure I have slides.
2025-07-23 18:36:09 <@tdawson:fedora.im> I'm going to move to a more Open Floor ...
2025-07-23 18:36:16 <@tdawson:fedora.im> 
2025-07-23 18:36:16 <@tdawson:fedora.im> !topic General Issues / Open Floor
2025-07-23 18:36:31 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> !link https://github.com/rpm-software-management/dnf/issues/2259
2025-07-23 18:37:12 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> tldr: there's a bug in dnf-automatic that is incorrectly presenting epel10.1 to 10.0 systems
2025-07-23 18:37:26 <@rcallicotte:fedora.im> oh yikes
2025-07-23 18:37:56 <@tdawson:fedora.im> oof
2025-07-23 18:38:08 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> i've been looking through the code but haven't been able to pin down the cause yet.  any help would be appreciated, especially if someone already feels like they know the dnf4 codebase well.
2025-07-23 18:40:47 <@rcallicotte:fedora.im> dumb question, but does %dist properly identify on host system/ubi?
2025-07-23 18:41:17 <@rcallicotte:fedora.im> dumb question, but does %releasever properly identify on host system/ubi?
2025-07-23 18:41:47 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> it does, that's used the the baseos/appstream baseurls
2025-07-23 18:43:10 <@rcallicotte:fedora.im> this is an interesting problem, I wish I had more time to look.  bust out a debugger and follow the code
2025-07-23 18:44:48 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Are there any other items for the Open Floor?
2025-07-23 18:46:13 <@tdawson:fedora.im> I guess we can call the meeting early this week.
2025-07-23 18:46:55 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Thank you all for coming and the good discussions and decisions this week.   And thank you all for all you do for EPEL and it's community.
2025-07-23 18:47:11 <@tdawson:fedora.im> I'll talk to ya'll next week, if not sooner.
2025-07-23 18:47:36 <@rcallicotte:fedora.im> Bye all
2025-07-23 18:47:45 <@tdawson:fedora.im> !endmeeting
2025-07-23 18:47:45 <@tdawson:fedora.im>