2025-10-16 16:00:38 <@james:fedora.im> !startmeeting fpc

2025-10-16 16:00:40 <@meetbot:fedora.im> Meeting started at 2025-10-16 16:00:38 UTC
2025-10-16 16:00:40 <@meetbot:fedora.im> The Meeting name is 'fpc'
2025-10-16 16:00:44 <@james:fedora.im> !topic Roll Call
2025-10-16 16:00:50 <@limb:fedora.im> !hi
2025-10-16 16:00:53 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Gwyn Ciesla (limb) - she / her / hers
2025-10-16 16:01:22 <@churchyard:fedora.im> !hi
2025-10-16 16:01:22 <@james:fedora.im> Hey
2025-10-16 16:01:22 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Miro Hrončok (churchyard) - he / him / his or they / them / theirs
2025-10-16 16:01:27 <@churchyard:fedora.im> I am around, reading the Go guidelines
2025-10-16 16:02:19 <@james:fedora.im> You thinking about changing them, or just looking things up as you do something to a Go package?
2025-10-16 16:03:31 <@churchyard:fedora.im> I mean the proposed ones by gotmax23  https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/pull-request/1498
2025-10-16 16:04:54 <@james:fedora.im> Ahh, fair enough. I'll tag that with meeting.
2025-10-16 16:09:24 <@salimma:fedora.im> !hi
2025-10-16 16:09:25 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Michel Lind (salimma) - he / him / his
2025-10-16 16:13:02 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> !hi
2025-10-16 16:13:03 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Fabio Valentini (decathorpe) - he / him / his
2025-10-16 16:13:15 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> sorry just had to run to catch a bus
2025-10-16 16:13:25 <@james:fedora.im> No problem. That makes 5 of us.
2025-10-16 16:13:35 <@james:fedora.im> In theory we can do all the things now ;)
2025-10-16 16:14:28 <@limb:fedora.im> Wow. No pressure.
2025-10-16 16:14:54 <@salimma:fedora.im> RFC: Year of the Linux Desktop
2025-10-16 16:15:25 <@james:fedora.im> !topic FPC PR#1497 https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/1497
2025-10-16 16:16:06 <@salimma:fedora.im> huh 404
2025-10-16 16:16:16 <@james:fedora.im> A PR by Stephen Gallagher would be nice ;) ... but I think after the question/answers everyone is on board with the change?
2025-10-16 16:16:25 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> private ticket ... 
2025-10-16 16:16:49 <@james:fedora.im> Hmm ... and not everyone can see it? I'm not sure how to fix that.
2025-10-16 16:16:50 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> "on board" well ... it's annoying as hell but sure I guess this needs to be done 
2025-10-16 16:16:59 <@james:fedora.im> I'm guessing a fas change ... let me look.
2025-10-16 16:17:08 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> Michel Lind UTC+1 is not a group member IIRC?
2025-10-16 16:17:23 <@salimma:fedora.im> I joined last and never had to see a private ticket so it's possible
2025-10-16 16:17:41 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> James: I’ll send a PR once it’s approved, yes. 
2025-10-16 16:18:47 <@limb:fedora.im> I'd rather see the PR first as is customary but I'm +1 generally and won't block on the PR
2025-10-16 16:20:37 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> same here
2025-10-16 16:21:39 <@james:fedora.im> Ahh, I see: https://github.com/praiskup/norpm/blob/main/rawhide-tests/expected.yaml
2025-10-16 16:22:20 <@james:fedora.im> Ahh, ruby, never change.
2025-10-16 16:23:16 <@churchyard:fedora.im> I would like to see the guideline proposed. If it needs to be in a private ticket, no need for a PR yet. But the devil is in the details. What *exactly* is supposed to be allowed and what not
2025-10-16 16:25:52 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> yeah. at least some common patterns like the gsub macro really need to be supported (and apparently already are?), but this needs to be documented
2025-10-16 16:27:03 <@churchyard:fedora.im> and the forgemeta thing -- not allowing that would explode in our faces
2025-10-16 16:27:41 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> that too ... so that affects both go and fonts packages?
2025-10-16 16:28:06 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> *and* all packages that use the forge macros outside of those use cases I guess
2025-10-16 16:28:11 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> I’m working with Pavel to figure these exceptional cases out. 
2025-10-16 16:28:32 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> We will put together a PR and send it. I don’t think that part needs to be in private.
2025-10-16 16:28:46 <@gotmax:matrix.org> What's the issue with the forge macros now?
2025-10-16 16:29:09 <@james:fedora.im> Michel Lind UTC+1: Okay, You've been added to the FAS group `packaging-committee` now. Might need a few minutes for pagure to sync.
2025-10-16 16:29:30 <@gotmax:matrix.org> FAS Groups don't sync over to Pagure.io by the way
2025-10-16 16:29:30 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> I don't think that syncs? the pagure.io project has a separate list of members. 
2025-10-16 16:29:44 <@james:fedora.im> Ahh, good times.
2025-10-16 16:29:55 <@james:fedora.im> Manual syncing is fun.
2025-10-16 16:30:19 <@churchyard:fedora.im> they might or might not be parseable by https://github.com/praiskup/norpm
2025-10-16 16:30:54 <@salimma:fedora.im> yeah logging out and logging back in and refreshing does not get me access
2025-10-16 16:30:57 <@gotmax:matrix.org> They probably won't, unless someone wants to reimplement them in Python...
2025-10-16 16:33:40 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> But I understand the convenience factor.
2025-10-16 16:34:35 <@james:fedora.im> Michel Lind UTC+1: Okay, you are in the pagure group now too.
2025-10-16 16:37:06 <@james:fedora.im> I always had mixed feelings ... it doesn't seem enough on it's own, but I was hoping someone would do a thing where you could throw a patch at a package and then everything including the version/build would automatically get done and then you could test a package.
2025-10-16 16:37:17 <@james:fedora.im> I know ... I have weird dreams ;)
2025-10-16 16:38:08 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> The *version* field I specifically feel like should have some intentionality to it.
2025-10-16 16:38:29 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> In general, I wouldn't want that to change unexpectedly, and having to set it manually helps that.
2025-10-16 16:38:37 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> But that's not really relevant to the topic
2025-10-16 16:38:43 <@salimma:fedora.im> Thanks. I am pulled into another meeting but will check later
2025-10-16 16:39:41 <@gotmax:matrix.org> The latest change in the forge macros was to make it possible to generate Version because the Guidelines want git snapshot information to be included in Version, not magically added to Release like they were before
2025-10-16 16:39:55 <@james:fedora.im> Okay ... I'm going to assume Michel, or anyone else not here, won't randomly hate the idea in new ways. So if Stephen Gallagher wants to start a PR, we can probably merge it fairly soon.
2025-10-16 16:40:15 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> !hi
2025-10-16 16:40:17 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Neal Gompa (ngompa) - he / him / his
2025-10-16 16:40:43 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> I shouldn't be here, because I'm feeling half-dead, but I think this new restriction is unworkable
2025-10-16 16:41:13 <@james:fedora.im> haha ... just in time ;)
2025-10-16 16:42:06 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> tbh, I've always thought rpmautospec was badly done, and I think the fact that Stephen Gallagher is thinking of even new restrictions on spec parsing for it reinforces it
2025-10-16 16:42:20 <@james:fedora.im> Conan Kudo 😷🤒🤧: Do you think it needs a few more exceptions added ... or it's just not workable?
2025-10-16 16:42:23 <@gotmax:matrix.org> But requiring specfiles to be parse-able by some tool other than RPM that doesn't support all of its constructs (if that's what's being discussed) seems backwards
2025-10-16 16:42:51 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> we should go the other way: instead of attempting to parse anything, just erase the Release field and write it again
2025-10-16 16:43:02 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> gotmax23: NoRPM is a stopgap measure; RPM upstream is also considering incorporating the same functionality. It'll just take years to land.
2025-10-16 16:43:52 <@james:fedora.im> Stephen Gallagher: NoRPM = https://pypi.org/project/norpm/1.0/ ?
2025-10-16 16:43:56 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Conan Kudo 😷🤒🤧: It is parseable so that we can figure out how long ago it last changed, in order to compute the release number
2025-10-16 16:44:05 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> because you're using the wrong input
2025-10-16 16:44:17 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> don't ask the spec file, ask the build system
2025-10-16 16:44:31 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> the build system has all that data in a fully safe form
2025-10-16 16:45:10 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> James: Yes, that's the one
2025-10-16 16:45:41 <@churchyard:fedora.im> Conan Kudo 😷🤒🤧: I don't think this is helpful. I know your opinion on rpmautospec.
2025-10-16 16:45:47 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> you wouldn't even need to ask, that number would just be another input for the build
2025-10-16 16:45:53 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> yeah
2025-10-16 16:46:30 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> we could even make it simpler and just add a %buildrelease macro to the disttag so that if the value is set, it will expand
2025-10-16 16:46:42 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Conan Kudo 😷🤒🤧: That only works if every build of that package always goes through the same central system. It doesn't account for local builds, mock or COPR.
2025-10-16 16:46:47 <@churchyard:fedora.im> 
2025-10-16 16:46:47 <@churchyard:fedora.im> > The requested change is "executable code in the Epoch, Version, or Release is forbidden when %autorelease is in use".
2025-10-16 16:46:47 <@churchyard:fedora.im> For reference for those who do not see the private ticket:
2025-10-16 16:47:22 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> COPR is already broken with the existing system
2025-10-16 16:48:01 <@gotmax:matrix.org> I assume "executable code" includes both `%(...)` shell and `%{lua:...}` expansions?
2025-10-16 16:48:04 <@churchyard:fedora.im> I also noticed now that the proposed rule is contradicting itself as %autorelease is in use in Release and is executable code :D
2025-10-16 16:48:10 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> yup
2025-10-16 16:48:34 <@churchyard:fedora.im> pretty much. but standard macros implementedin Lua (think %gsub) should be allowed
2025-10-16 16:48:58 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> but they can't be if rpmautospec uses norpm
2025-10-16 16:49:02 <@gotmax:matrix.org> I think gsub is a builtin macro that calls lua in C
2025-10-16 16:49:08 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> it is
2025-10-16 16:49:15 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Conan Kudo 😷🤒🤧: That statement is false.
2025-10-16 16:49:23 <@churchyard:fedora.im> Conan Kudo 😷🤒🤧: norpm reimplements gsub in python
2025-10-16 16:49:31 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> As mhroncok says.
2025-10-16 16:49:50 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> NoRPM will reimplement some common ones to make this transition easier.
2025-10-16 16:49:57 <@churchyard:fedora.im> but my concern in the ticket was that I don't want a rule that replies on the implementation details
2025-10-16 16:49:59 <@gotmax:matrix.org> And also it's not supported in some RHELs so packages that need to do common string operations like gsub in a backward compatible way need bash or lua expansions...
2025-10-16 16:50:13 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Because some (like gsub) don't need to invoke a complete language
2025-10-16 16:50:27 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> gotmax23: What's not supported in RHEL?
2025-10-16 16:50:38 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> %gsub is fairly new 
2025-10-16 16:50:39 <@churchyard:fedora.im> IIRC I cannot use gsub as even Zuul is too old to understand it, so I need to use Lua or Bash
2025-10-16 16:50:41 <@gotmax:matrix.org> And is there a reason for requiring this? Why is it tied together with using rpmautospec?
2025-10-16 16:50:55 <@gotmax:matrix.org> gsub and the lua wrappers added along with it
2025-10-16 16:51:02 <@gotmax:matrix.org> %gsub and the lua wrappers added along with it
2025-10-16 16:51:06 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> gotmax23: That's in the private ticket. I can't say here.
2025-10-16 16:51:10 <@churchyard:fedora.im> gotmax23: that's kidna why the ticket is private
2025-10-16 16:51:47 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> well it's kind of silly that this is a private issue but oh well 
2025-10-16 16:51:48 <@gotmax:matrix.org> Development discussions like this shouldn't be private
2025-10-16 16:51:57 <@gotmax:matrix.org> This isn't RHEL
2025-10-16 16:52:09 <@churchyard:fedora.im> there is no conspiracy here, the privacy is justified 
2025-10-16 16:52:33 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> gotmax23: I assume you can't see the ticket, but think about why I (an outspoken member of the "everything should be public" crew) would have made it private.
2025-10-16 16:52:44 <@gotmax:matrix.org> I didn't mean to imply a conspiracy
2025-10-16 16:52:57 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> to be honest the more I learn about this the less I like the proposed solution. let's just change rpmautospec to not parse spec files. and let's throw out epoch:version-release tags from changelogs too while we're at it ...
2025-10-16 16:53:00 <@churchyard:fedora.im> I am not saying it MUST have been private, but I understand the resoning behind it
2025-10-16 16:53:30 <@james:fedora.im> Is there any way to let gotmax see it without adding him to the FPC group?
2025-10-16 16:53:45 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> not after the fact I think 
2025-10-16 16:53:53 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> James: I can reach out to him via a secure message. I trust him.
2025-10-16 16:54:00 <@gotmax:matrix.org> I would guess something is parsing untrusted specifles in a trusted environment but don't really want to speculate
2025-10-16 16:54:47 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> is it time for the "neither confirm nor deny" joke?
2025-10-16 16:56:03 <@james:fedora.im> Somewhat related ... I saw these recently: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0FC9VFS49/
2025-10-16 16:56:27 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> we could actually drop EVR tags from changelog entries and require people to specify version number in the text in version bumps
2025-10-16 16:56:30 <@james:fedora.im> But not sure I have enough spare money to buy enough for everyone ;)
2025-10-16 16:56:37 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> technically, it's already accepted, just not mandatory
2025-10-16 16:57:29 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Conan Kudo 😷🤒🤧: I'm in favor of eliminating EVR from changelog entries, FWIW.
2025-10-16 16:57:50 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> (I'm also in favor of eliminating them entirely, since git history exists, but...)
2025-10-16 16:58:01 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> yeah no, not that
2025-10-16 17:00:25 <@churchyard:fedora.im> I am in favor of eliminating computers
2025-10-16 17:00:34 <@churchyard:fedora.im> it was a mistake
2025-10-16 17:00:48 <@james:fedora.im> Maybe AI will do that for us
2025-10-16 17:00:51 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> mhroncok++
2025-10-16 17:00:53 <@zodbot:fedora.im> sgallagh gave a cookie to churchyard. They now have 179 cookies, 12 of which were obtained in the Fedora 42 release cycle
2025-10-16 17:01:07 <@limb:fedora.im> You could make the same case for agricultural societies.
2025-10-16 17:01:11 <@churchyard:fedora.im> ok, let's move on for now?
2025-10-16 17:02:10 <@james:fedora.im> But FWIW I also find rpm changelog to be an artifact from 1995 that would be very different if done now, and maybe the best thing to do is make it go away and let someone tie in something better.
2025-10-16 17:02:34 <@james:fedora.im> Well, technically we are 2m over time. So we can all go home.
2025-10-16 17:02:43 <@james:fedora.im> !topic Open Floor
2025-10-16 17:03:07 <@james:fedora.im> Anything we need to speak about before the day before halloween?
2025-10-16 17:03:18 <@churchyard:fedora.im> gotmax23: I tried to provide some input tot he go guidelines proposal. note that it is very opinionated. happy to discuss it synchronously as well
2025-10-16 17:04:07 <@gotmax:matrix.org> Thank you! I'll try to take another look after I eat lunch :)
2025-10-16 17:04:07 <@james:fedora.im> If anyone has time ... can you take a quick look at the R PR: https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/pull-request/1494
2025-10-16 17:04:17 <@james:fedora.im> Hopefully we can get that merged.
2025-10-16 17:05:16 <@james:fedora.im> Seems simple, so unless anyone objects this week I'll probably hit merge tomorrow.
2025-10-16 17:06:24 <@james:fedora.im> Saying that I know basically nothing about R, so if anyone knows anything please take a look. 
2025-10-16 17:06:48 <@churchyard:fedora.im> the only thing I know about R is that it's hard to google it
2025-10-16 17:07:14 <@churchyard:fedora.im> which is even not true anymore :D
2025-10-16 17:08:35 <@james:fedora.im> On that note...
2025-10-16 17:08:37 <@james:fedora.im> !endmeeting