<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:30:31
!startmeeting Fedora ai-ml
<@meetbot:fedora.im>
16:30:31
Meeting started at 2024-07-18 16:30:31 UTC
<@meetbot:fedora.im>
16:30:32
The Meeting name is 'Fedora ai-ml'
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:30:44
!topic roll call
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:30:46
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
16:30:47
Tim Flink (tflink)
<@man2dev:fedora.im>
16:31:04
Hello
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:32:26
we have quite a bit of stuff to cover today, so let's get started
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:32:33
!topic Status
<@jsteffan:fedora.im>
16:33:01
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
16:33:02
Jonathan Steffan (jsteffan)
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:33:14
!info F41 Self-Contained changes were submitted for pytorch 2.4 and rocm 6.2
<@mystro256:fedora.im>
16:33:43
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
16:33:44
None (mystro256)
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:33:54
I think that rocm 6.1 is almost ready for F40, it's mostly missing testing?
<@trix:fedora.im>
16:33:56
sorry was in another meeting..
<@mystro256:fedora.im>
16:33:56
(Apparently I'm "none")
<@mystro256:fedora.im>
16:34:21
6.1 is in testing right now
<@man2dev:fedora.im>
16:34:21
OK so what's first?
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:34:40
it reads directly from FAS, AFAIK. are there any empty fields?
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:35:01
are there any other items that I'm missing WRT status updates?
<@mystro256:fedora.im>
16:35:32
Fyi F40 update to rocm 6.1 is here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-2a06d36b71
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:35:39
!info ROCm 6.1 for F40 is in testing, please test if you are able
<@mystro256:fedora.im>
16:37:02
Looks like there's still a bug, I'll check it later. I think bodhi won't autopush if there's a downvote right?
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:37:14
yes, any negative karma disables autopush
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:37:49
I should have linked this earlier but the agenda is:
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:37:51
!link https://board.net/p/fedora-pytorch-meeting
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:38:08
I assume that's all for the status updates, moving on
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:38:15
!topic pending meeting changes
<@mystro256:fedora.im>
16:38:26
I disabled autopush based on time just in case
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:38:43
I apologize for not getting most of this done already - it just keeps falling off my todo list with other stuff going on for me
<@man2dev:fedora.im>
16:38:52
proposal: start tracking SIG work items in pagure ai-sig repo Issue.
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:39:42
does this mean that you're not happy with how I'm running the meeting or is there some issue on matrix WRT test showing up?
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:40:39
!info after the last meeting, we decided to make some changes which still need to be done and will be before the next meeting
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:41:09
!action tflink to change meeting name, move calendar from google to fedora, clarify that future meetings will all be on matrix unless otherwise scheduled
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:41:29
that was pretty much it for this topic. is there anything I missed or are there any questions?
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:42:23
I take that as a no and we can move on
<@man2dev:fedora.im>
16:42:51
YES
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:43:12
!topic Tracking SIG work in pagure
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:43:38
There has been some discussion lately around starting to track SIG work in pagure tickets
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:43:56
as I recall, the last time this was brought up, there was quite a bit of resistance to the idea
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:44:26
am I mis-remembering or has that changed enough to start tracking work more formally in tickets?
<@mystro256:fedora.im>
16:44:58
I have no strong feelings. Tom Rix did you have concerns?
<@trix:fedora.im>
16:45:15
😂
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:45:25
!info there has been discussion recently about starting to track SIG work in pagure
<@trix:fedora.im>
16:45:37
do we want fedora to be more like a job or a hobby ?
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:45:40
!info this proposal is to create the repo in pagure and start tracking SIG related work in it
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:46:14
I think it's more about keeping sanity and not duplicating work if we don't have to, honestly
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:46:47
it is overhead, yes but I'm not convinced it's pointless busywork so long as we don't create too many tickets or tickets for everything
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:47:15
but this is a group decision, hence the discussion :)
<@trix:fedora.im>
16:47:45
would we be able to use it to get more people to help out ?
<@trix:fedora.im>
16:48:03
as more people helping is what i think is our big problem.
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:48:20
I think that having some method for organizing work will be more important if/when we get more people
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:48:45
it can help new folks know where to start
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:50:15
proposal: create a fedora-ai-ml repo in pagure and start tracking relevant work in that repo as tickets
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:50:27
can I get a show of +1/-1
<@man2dev:fedora.im>
16:50:53
Basicly Everyone seems to be in favor as long as it's not overused?
<@trix:fedora.im>
16:51:11
abstain
<@man2dev:fedora.im>
16:51:24
+1
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:51:29
that does seem to be the feeling but I would like to have a more exact showing before we make a change
<@mystro256:fedora.im>
16:51:49
Abstain (indifferent)
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:52:03
+1
<@jsteffan:fedora.im>
16:52:26
+1 (with the caveat that i'm okay with using whatever method we all agree upon)
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:52:33
I'm seeing 3x +1 and 2x +0
<@mystro256:fedora.im>
16:52:47
Whatever works, wiki page, bugtracker, multicoloured balloons
<@mystro256:fedora.im>
16:52:59
Naval flags ;)
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:53:36
!info AGREED: we will a fedora-ai-ml repo in pagure and start tracking relevant work in that repo as tickets
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:53:58
if there are concerns about too many tickets, please bring the issue up and we can deal with it
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:54:12
too many tickets, the wrong kind of tickets etc.
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:54:25
!action tflink to create ai-ml-sig pagure repo
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:54:40
anything else on this or shall we move on?
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:55:12
!topic names and groups
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:56:10
!info there are currently several groups that are part of Fedora's AI/ML SIG. Among the packaging groups for pytorch and rocm
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:57:04
there have been two proposals brought up in the same thing and I'm trying to not confuse them
<@mystro256:fedora.im>
16:57:20
I'm assuming Intel is a dead end right now? I assume there's nv interest, but a lot of it is rpmfusion required
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:57:45
The direct proposal has been to rename the pytorch-sig packaging group to include all ai-ml and pytorch packages
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:58:24
It's not deaf AFAIK but the folks I know of who are working on that stuff don't participate here
<@man2dev:fedora.im>
16:58:48
I was talking about the http://src.fedoraproject.org/group/pytorch-sig
<@tflink:fedora.im>
16:58:50
The direct proposal has been to rename the pytorch-sig packaging group and include all ai-ml and pytorch packages
<@trix:fedora.im>
16:59:16
this was to organize the original work to get the dependencies in
<@trix:fedora.im>
16:59:20
they are in.
<@trix:fedora.im>
16:59:46
i did a lot of them, ok with me if that is killed off
<@man2dev:fedora.im>
16:59:57
So that wascan place all ai projects in coherent place
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:00:49
the question then becomes whether we want to have one group to act as maintainers (if only backup maintainers) for ai/ml related packages
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:00:52
new AI package should be tracked by whatever majic bz someone setup years ago. that is all we need.
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:01:36
unless we want to have a larger distgit group for package maintenance kind of like the python SIG has
<@jsteffan:fedora.im>
17:01:43
this was the original reason we kept the pytorch sig
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:01:59
or how we have the rocm packages set up
<@jsteffan:fedora.im>
17:03:09
based on the current velocity, i don't think we have a noisy room situation. it might be best to not solve tomorrow's problems and just try to achieve critical mass first
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:03:13
bah, I keep losing connection to matrix. not sure what's going on today
<@jsteffan:fedora.im>
17:03:17
based on the current velocity, i don't think we have a noisy room situation. it might be best to not solve tomorrow's problems and just try to achieve critical contributor mass first
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:03:43
set one, start a list of what are the ai packages
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:03:53
step one, i mean
<@jsteffan:fedora.im>
17:04:01
it's a federation issue causing tons of network issues (saw some stuff on the ubuntu matrix ops channel)
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:04:13
blame ubuntu!
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:04:35
yeah, I'm somewhat ambivalent on this one - it's a future problem to make shared maintenance easier if folks become busy or don't want to maintain packages at some point
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:04:43
its not their fault, just good for laugh
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:04:56
I also don't know if dist-git groups can be renamed
<@jsteffan:fedora.im>
17:05:03
they can't
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:05:28
in the *torch space, it would be good if it wasn't just me
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:06:01
as chasing 2.4 is sucking up a lot of time.
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:06:09
Tom Rix: what is your opinion on creating a group for maintance? in practice, this would affect you the most, I think
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:06:35
yes.
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:06:59
ok, we can do that, then
<@jsteffan:fedora.im>
17:07:06
i'm in support of casting a wider net and letting people rely on email/notification filters until it becomes a real, not just perceived, issue
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:07:34
yeah, dist-git PRs are definitely a thing :)
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:07:47
tflink: is worried i will be hit by bus or bit by snake or something
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:08:04
or hit by snakebus
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:08:07
pretty much, yeah. I'm a big believer of the bus rule or keeping the bus number over 1
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:08:39
proposal: create an ai-ml group in dist-git for shared maintenance of ai/ml related packages
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:08:54
+1/0/-1 votes?
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:08:55
so how about we start a discussion on the boards see who all may be interested in at least helping with *torch
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:09:10
that works for me
<@jsteffan:fedora.im>
17:09:14
+1 (and this is already done)
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:09:36
the discussion? if so, can you link?
<@jsteffan:fedora.im>
17:09:57
no, to the proposal of create an ai-ml group in dist-git for shared maintenance of ai/ml related packages
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:10:09
or is there a dist-git group that I'm forgetting about?
<@jsteffan:fedora.im>
17:11:22
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/groups/g/ai-ml/coprs/ https://accounts.fedoraproject.org/group/ai-ml-sig/
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:11:39
I thought that was just fas and gitlab, though - not dist-git
<@jsteffan:fedora.im>
17:11:40
where we had some previous issue was mapping to the gitlab group. i think we needed to change group names or something
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:11:44
easy-ish first thing would be take torchchar for a spin vs gitcommit/2.4 version of torch.
<@jsteffan:fedora.im>
17:11:58
i thought dist-git was mapped to fas
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:12:14
if you like that, i'll add you to the users ..
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:12:24
I think that packaging groups are special groups in FAS and the mapping isn't 1:1 or guaranteed
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:12:25
do it for 2 and i will add you to all of them.
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:12:47
either way, I think this can be tabled for the next meeting pending investigation and maybe discussion
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:12:55
and there are torch things on my wish list..
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:13:11
sorry talking about happy future.
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:13:20
daMaestro: can you take the AI to figure out whether the existing groups map to dist-git or should I?
<@jsteffan:fedora.im>
17:13:30
it can be our first ticket in the fedora-ai-ml pagure
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:13:31
we do need to get triton in.
<@jsteffan:fedora.im>
17:14:14
tflink: if you are able to do it that would be great. i can contribute on the ticket
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:14:27
!action tflink to file ticket about clarifying whether the existing ai-ml FAS groups map to dist-git
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:15:09
!info there are some unanswered questions around group usage right now and this isn't an urgent need so it is being tabled for now for investigation and potential discussion on discourse
<@jsteffan:fedora.im>
17:15:12
the outcome of that ticket should be a document of all of the groups, their purpose, and responsibilities for members in those groups
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:15:38
yeah, that makes sense - that should be documented somewhere
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:16:33
Tom Rix: sorry for talking over you a bit, I wanted to wrap up the group topic first. do you want to talk more about the packaging wishlist now?
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:16:50
sure.
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:17:03
!topic ai-ml packaging wishlist
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:17:09
with 2.4 coming up, the *torch things need a refresh.
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:17:36
there are some (3) new packages in torch that maybe need to be fedora.
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:17:49
see the spec file.
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:17:58
you mean torchvision, torchaudio etc. or are there more?
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:18:48
i personaly just following torch things because i had to draw the line.
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:18:55
with day job.
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:19:35
which packages are you talking about WRT *torch - is it all the things that depend on torch or is a subset of that?
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:19:56
anything in the main upstream torch repo
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:20:07
there are about 30 projects there
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:20:49
i would like fedora to robustly support these.
<@man2dev:fedora.im>
17:21:00
Pip might not be Recognizing the torch package.
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:21:01
sense its an ecosystem things
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:21:06
for the sake of clarity, are you talking about repos in https://github.com/pytorch
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:21:18
ok, 75.. crapppp
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:21:19
I haven't forgotten, that's the next topic
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:21:48
a big one the crosses pytorch and rocm is triton.
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:22:01
triton is the big thing i want to do next.
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:22:05
Tom Rix: do you have a list of the packages that need to be updated and added?
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:22:29
for day job, yes.
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:23:10
let's see if this renders passably
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:23:19
in part i could organize this _if_ someone wanted to help, otherwise i make a list on my desk and do that.
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:23:30
python3-torchvision-0:0.16.0-7.fc40.x86_64
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:23:30
```
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:23:30
```# dnf repoquery --whatrequires python3-torch
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:23:30
python3-torch-devel-0:2.1.2-11.fc40.x86_64
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:23:30
python3-torch-devel-0:2.1.2-3.fc40.x86_64
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:23:30
python3-torchdata-0:0.7.0-5.fc40.noarch
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:23:40
kinda
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:23:52
that was the output of ```# dnf repoquery --whatrequires python3-torch```
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:24:11
f40 these packages atm are cpu only.
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:24:34
we did a late update for f40 to be rocm-ing.
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:24:35
I know, I'm just trying to get a more exact list and don't have a rawhide machine powered up ATM
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:25:05
I'd say the packaging wishlist is something that we could do. folks may or may not help but if there's no list, people are unlikely to help
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:25:28
but if there are packages which need updating, I'm happy to help where I can
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:26:09
I propose that we move this to discourse in 2 threads - one for the torch packages which need updating now for 2.4 and another thread for the packaging wishlist (that could also be tickets in pagure)
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:26:23
give those above a whirl on f40. at least torchvision could be rocm powered in f40 if it was updated from rawhide
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:27:23
Tom Rix: would you be willing to create a list of the packages which need to be refreshed?
<@mystro256:fedora.im>
17:28:06
Related: I have a wip for rocdecode, rocm multimedia sdk
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:28:51
is that packageable in fedora?
<@mystro256:fedora.im>
17:28:53
Might be needed for something later
<@jsteffan:fedora.im>
17:29:20
the list of packages would be great to have. i'm also available to do package reviews, i'm already down the rabbit hole with XR stuff. minimally i can do first pass stuff, and if i understand the details of the package i can do the full review.
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:30:17
I think that we're starting to drift a bit and we're running out of time for this week. any objections to continuing this discussion outside of the meeting?
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:30:28
thats fine
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:31:23
!info there seems to be interest in having some forms of packaging wishlist and/or list of packages which currently need updating. discussion will continue outside of the meeting and will be picked up at the next meeting if need be
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:31:27
ok, moving on
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:31:38
!topic pip and system site-packages
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:32:10
I'm not sure this needs to be discussed in meeting but there seems to be a concern that pip isn't seeing python packages which are installed via RPM
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:32:37
my first question is whether this is being done in a venv or venv equivalent
<@man2dev:fedora.im>
17:32:54
No native
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:34:01
I forget, does pip automatically install stuff to some $HOME/ subdir
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:35:02
either way, I think this is better addressed in a bug report or discourse topic. Mohammadreza Hendiani would you mind creating an issue or starting a topic on discourse about this?
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:35:22
and letting us know where the issue is filed if you go that route?
<@man2dev:fedora.im>
17:35:29
Sure
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:35:34
thanks
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:35:47
!info this issue will be explored offline in an issue or discourse topic
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:35:53
last one
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:36:04
!topic open floor
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:36:15
are there any other topics that folks want to bring up?
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:36:58
extending time of meeting to cover actual time we spend in meeting ?
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:37:17
you mean do an hour on the schedule instead of 30 mintues?
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:37:21
yes
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:37:34
or did you mean that I should have ended the meeting at 30 minutes instead of letting it go to over 60?
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:38:12
going longer is fine.. in calendar fight with other meetings, it is good if this meetings time reflects real time.
<@man2dev:fedora.im>
17:38:33
Agreed
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:38:40
unfortunately day job is filled with calendar fights.
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:38:49
most Fedora group matrix meetings are scheduled for 60 mintes, I'm fine with doing that
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:39:31
I'll do that when I move the meeting from google to fedora calendar
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:40:02
if there's nothing else, we're over the 60 minutes we're talking about extending to
<@trix:fedora.im>
17:40:11
lunch!
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:40:18
+1
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:40:32
ok, thanks for coming, everyone
<@tflink:fedora.im>
17:40:41
!endmeeting