2025-05-13 17:01:59 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> !startmeeting FESCo (2025-05-13)
2025-05-13 17:02:01 <@meetbot:fedora.im> Meeting started at 2025-05-13 17:01:59 UTC
2025-05-13 17:02:01 <@meetbot:fedora.im> The Meeting name is 'FESCo (2025-05-13)'
2025-05-13 17:02:07 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> !meetingname fesco
2025-05-13 17:02:08 <@meetbot:fedora.im> The Meeting Name is now fesco
2025-05-13 17:02:15 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> !group members fesco
2025-05-13 17:02:18 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Members of fesco: David Cantrell, Fabio Valentini, Fabio Alessandro Locati, Tomáš Hrčka, Kevin Fenzi, Matthew Miller, ngompa (@conan_kudo:matrix.org, @ngompa:fedora.im, @pharaoh_atem:opensuse.org, @ngompa:kde.org, @ngompa:almalinux.im), Michel Lind, Stephen Gallagher, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
2025-05-13 17:02:21 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> !hi
2025-05-13 17:02:21 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> !topic Init Process
2025-05-13 17:02:22 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Stephen Gallagher (sgallagh) - he / him / his
2025-05-13 17:02:28 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> !hi
2025-05-13 17:02:29 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek (zbyszek)
2025-05-13 17:02:38 <@salimma:fedora.im> hi!
2025-05-13 17:02:50 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> morning
2025-05-13 17:02:56 <@salimma:fedora.im> Neal told me he has a dentist appointment so will unfortunately miss this one
2025-05-13 17:03:42 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> ok, we are only five yet, let's wait a minute 
2025-05-13 17:05:46 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> ok, let's start
2025-05-13 17:05:59 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> !topic #3385 Change: Java25 And No More System JDK
2025-05-13 17:06:05 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> !fesco 3385
2025-05-13 17:06:06 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Assignee:** jvanek
2025-05-13 17:06:06 <@zodbot:fedora.im> **fesco #3385** (https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3385):**Change: Java25 And No More System JDK**
2025-05-13 17:06:06 <@zodbot:fedora.im> 
2025-05-13 17:06:06 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Opened:** a month ago by amoloney
2025-05-13 17:06:06 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Last Updated:** an hour ago
2025-05-13 17:07:11 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> Don't think there has been much news here.
2025-05-13 17:07:17 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> The Change page hasn't been updated since the beginning of may. In other words, it's still very hard to read.
2025-05-13 17:07:33 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> Jiri wrote that they're on vacation in May
2025-05-13 17:08:26 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> I voted +1 in the ticket. I think it mostly makes sense. Maybe the page can be clarified later.
2025-05-13 17:08:41 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> I think I get what they're trying to do now, but I still think the Change proposal itself is like 10x as complicated as it needs to be 
2025-05-13 17:08:51 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I was +1... although some of the clarifications have confused me rather than clarified. ;)
2025-05-13 17:09:35 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> anyway, it's just on the agenda because my -1 vote from ages ago still stands, but I'm not sure if waiting even longer with voting will make this any better
2025-05-13 17:10:06 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> Option 1) back to ticket and ask people to vote, Option 2) vote now (with not many people present, outcome questionable)
2025-05-13 17:10:59 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> I think it has to be Option 1, because I'm going to vote 0 here.
2025-05-13 17:11:08 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> Either way... perhaps ticket voting would be... ah, nevermind
2025-05-13 17:11:30 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> (I gave these two options because I suspected that I wouldn't be the only "0" vote 🙃) 
2025-05-13 17:11:51 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Option 3) punt until the text is updated after the latest comments.
2025-05-13 17:12:08 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> zbyszek: I guess that's fine too.
2025-05-13 17:12:19 <@salimma:fedora.im> yeah I don't mind waiting on this, there is less point voting until the CP is clarified
2025-05-13 17:12:22 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> zbyszek: the last update in the discussion *was* that the page was updated.
2025-05-13 17:12:28 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/f43-change-proposal-java25-and-no-more-system-jdk-system-wide/147319/29
2025-05-13 17:12:30 <@salimma:fedora.im> well there is, but I suspect it won't help get this in
2025-05-13 17:12:39 <@salimma:fedora.im> ahh
2025-05-13 17:13:09 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> it didn't necessarily make it *better* (there's just even more slightly contradictory stuff in it now, AFAICT ...)
2025-05-13 17:13:11 <@salimma:fedora.im> why does Jiri say "see you 19 May" - oh he's at Summit? that's not a fesco day
2025-05-13 17:13:33 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> I think it's because he's on vacation.
2025-05-13 17:14:50 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> anyway, I'm for option "back to in-ticket voting and I will withdraw my procedural -1 vote"
2025-05-13 17:15:01 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> objections?
2025-05-13 17:15:43 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Sounds good…
2025-05-13 17:15:50 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Yeah, let's do that
2025-05-13 17:15:54 <@salimma:fedora.im> yeah, I'd prefer voting in ticket than discussing it here again
2025-05-13 17:16:23 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> !info This Change will be voted on asynchronously in-ticket.
2025-05-13 17:16:41 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> !topic #3387 Include fesco-docs issues / pull-requests in FESCo meeting prep / agenda
2025-05-13 17:16:46 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> !fesco 3387
2025-05-13 17:16:46 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Assignee:** Not Assigned
2025-05-13 17:16:46 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Opened:** a month ago by decathorpe
2025-05-13 17:16:46 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Last Updated:** an hour ago
2025-05-13 17:16:46 <@zodbot:fedora.im> **fesco #3387** (https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3387):**Include fesco-docs issues / pull-requests in FESCo meeting prep / agenda**
2025-05-13 17:16:46 <@zodbot:fedora.im> 
2025-05-13 17:17:16 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> I posted suggested edits / additions to the meeting prep wiki page, would be great to get feedback, since I don't want to just make the edits
2025-05-13 17:17:50 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> I would also submit a PR to update fesco-docs to make it explicit that fesco-docs issues+PRs are covered by normal fesco voting rules, but that can happen afterwards.
2025-05-13 17:18:04 <@salimma:fedora.im> that looks fine
2025-05-13 17:18:09 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I think it's good.
2025-05-13 17:18:29 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> The plan looks good to me. (Assuming that we're going with the "keep the wiki" option.)
2025-05-13 17:18:45 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> zbyszek: yes, that is the assumption I was operating under :)
2025-05-13 17:19:30 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> I don't know that doc edits need to be covered by FESCo voting rules. *Changes to policy*, maybe. But writing that policy up?
2025-05-13 17:19:50 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> Stephen Gallagher: where do you draw the line?
2025-05-13 17:20:05 <@salimma:fedora.im> FPC reviews any edit to the packaging guidelines, this seems similar
2025-05-13 17:20:26 <@salimma:fedora.im> whether it's just wordsmithing or not
2025-05-13 17:20:30 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Fabio Valentini: "If another Fedora contributor challenges the change"?
2025-05-13 17:20:54 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> I'd rather just be explicit to preempt that sort of shenanigans ...
2025-05-13 17:20:56 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> In the past we didn't vote on changes to the wiki stuff.
2025-05-13 17:21:08 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Doc edits are supposed to be just capturing decisions that were already made
2025-05-13 17:21:23 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> anyway, not much to do here yet - please post feedback on the ticket, we don't need to discuss this synchronously.
2025-05-13 17:21:38 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> If there's sufficient ambiguity that trying to write it out leads to arguments... the policy needs fixing in that case (which should go back to a FESCo vote)
2025-05-13 17:21:54 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> I think we want to have a general consensus that the changes are OK and then just have Fabio edit the ticket. 
2025-05-13 17:22:13 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> FWIW, I'd prefer to decide this here. Is there any reason to have more "discussion"?
2025-05-13 17:22:19 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> The last substantial change was 16 days ago…
2025-05-13 17:22:42 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Or in other words: is anybody *against* the plan posted in the issue?
2025-05-13 17:22:49 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> If not, I think we can assume agreement.
2025-05-13 17:23:00 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> well, that's fine with me too
2025-05-13 17:23:08 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> no
2025-05-13 17:23:41 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> I mean, I think it's overkill, but I'm not willing to die on this hill
2025-05-13 17:24:03 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> well, if it ends up being "yes, looks fine" and takes just a few minutes... meh...
2025-05-13 17:24:14 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> Stephen Gallagher: are you talking about 1) including fesco-docs issues/PRs in meeting prep or 2) updating fesco policy to be explicit about voting rules?
2025-05-13 17:24:27 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> I think zbyszek was just talking about 1) now ...
2025-05-13 17:24:45 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Oh, I see the confusion now.
2025-05-13 17:25:52 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> The implication behind "including it in meeting prep" is that every PR needs a FESCo vote. I think that's heavyweight, but I don't care enough to keep arguing. (This is my last word on the matter today)
2025-05-13 17:26:14 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> OK, that is a good point.
2025-05-13 17:26:18 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> FWIW that implication is in your head, not intended by me ;)
2025-05-13 17:26:48 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> The intention is just to make sure no docs PRs / issues go unnoticed because they're never processed.
2025-05-13 17:27:24 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> Anyway, please post feedback on the ticket, we've been on this topic for almost 15 minutes, and I'd rather not have this be a long meeting today. 🙃
2025-05-13 17:27:57 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> moving on ...
2025-05-13 17:28:04 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> !topic #3408 Change: Wayland-only GNOME
2025-05-13 17:28:10 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> !fesco 3408
2025-05-13 17:28:11 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Last Updated:** an hour ago
2025-05-13 17:28:11 <@zodbot:fedora.im> **fesco #3408** (https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3408):**Change: Wayland-only GNOME**
2025-05-13 17:28:11 <@zodbot:fedora.im> 
2025-05-13 17:28:11 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Opened:** a week ago by amoloney
2025-05-13 17:28:11 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Assignee:** ngompa
2025-05-13 17:28:18 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> This is on the agenda because of a -1 vote.
2025-05-13 17:28:40 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I don't think the upstream gnome discussion has happened/we know whats come out of it yet.
2025-05-13 17:28:47 <@salimma:fedora.im> a) Neal is not here today, b) IIRC upstream has not decided on this either
2025-05-13 17:28:59 <@salimma:fedora.im> from what I hear at WG this morning they're waiting on Canonical to discuss this internally
2025-05-13 17:29:02 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> Yes, as far as I know that discussion will happen later today (after our meeting).
2025-05-13 17:29:11 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> punt!
2025-05-13 17:29:12 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> I haven't voted yet, but I'm leaning -1
2025-05-13 17:29:22 <@salimma:fedora.im> yeah on both count I'm in favor of punting again
2025-05-13 17:29:31 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> fwiw, if upstream moves first, there's no point in objecting ... 
2025-05-13 17:29:36 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I'd prefer to wait.
2025-05-13 17:29:37 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> but I'm for punt too 
2025-05-13 17:29:39 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> But I'm perfectly happy to wait for upstream's input
2025-05-13 17:30:25 <@salimma:fedora.im> when First and Friends collide
2025-05-13 17:30:30 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> !info We're still waiting for an upstream decision on the schedule for Xorg session removal.
2025-05-13 17:30:35 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> moving on ...
2025-05-13 17:30:45 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> !topic docs#94 Add lightweight stalled request process
2025-05-13 17:30:52 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> !link https://pagure.io/fesco/fesco-docs/pull-request/94
2025-05-13 17:31:02 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> Michel Lind UTC-6: any updates here? I think the discussion is pretty much over.
2025-05-13 17:31:11 <@salimma:fedora.im> been swamped and I did not do any update on this yet, apologies
2025-05-13 17:31:27 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> I cannot help but appreciate the irony of this ticket being stalled.
2025-05-13 17:31:28 <@salimma:fedora.im> is there anything else we need changed?
2025-05-13 17:31:36 <@salimma:fedora.im> oh definitely
2025-05-13 17:31:44 <@salimma:fedora.im> but once it's in hopefully we spend less time on stalled tickets! :P
2025-05-13 17:32:06 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> Ok - let's discuss this again when we have a final draft?
2025-05-13 17:32:19 <@salimma:fedora.im> yeah, let me catch up on the mailing list replies and make any necessary change
2025-05-13 17:32:40 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> great, thank you
2025-05-13 17:33:23 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> !info We are waiting for a final draft of the proposed Policy document that incorporates feedback from the discussion on the mailing list.
2025-05-13 17:33:33 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> !topic #3409 Deepin security review request
2025-05-13 17:33:37 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> !fesco 3409
2025-05-13 17:33:38 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Last Updated:** an hour ago
2025-05-13 17:33:38 <@zodbot:fedora.im> **fesco #3409** (https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3409):**Deepin security review request**
2025-05-13 17:33:38 <@zodbot:fedora.im> 
2025-05-13 17:33:38 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Opened:** 4 days ago by adamwill
2025-05-13 17:33:38 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Assignee:** Not Assigned
2025-05-13 17:33:53 <@salimma:fedora.im> this is fun
2025-05-13 17:34:05 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> we should definiltey have someone look into it. ;)
2025-05-13 17:34:13 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> I think we didn't pull our folks working on Deepin into the discussion yet.
2025-05-13 17:34:14 <@salimma:fedora.im> do we need to... resurrect our security team? or rely on RH's for this
2025-05-13 17:34:46 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> nirik: Why do I get the feeling you're planning to swap my FAS nick to `someone`? 😛
2025-05-13 17:34:55 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> there is no DDE spin, right?
2025-05-13 17:34:56 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> ha.
2025-05-13 17:35:44 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> there isn't one I don't think... I guess I should look as my memory isn't what it used to be
2025-05-13 17:36:12 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> yeah. doesn't look like it. so at least we don't ship any images with those packages preinstalled
2025-05-13 17:36:13 <@salimma:fedora.im> https://fedoraproject.org/spins
2025-05-13 17:36:15 <@salimma:fedora.im> none show up
2025-05-13 17:37:22 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> I don't think there's much we can do here, unless we claim that the security issues are so bad that the packages should get retired?
2025-05-13 17:37:28 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> So really I think we need to find someone(s) to look into our packages and see whats going on there.
2025-05-13 17:37:46 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> but not sure who wants to do that. :)
2025-05-13 17:38:14 <@salimma:fedora.im> does RH prodsec do analysis like this, or do they only do CVE tracking?
2025-05-13 17:38:35 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Michel Lind UTC-6: They are unlikely to put a high priority on this, given that RHEL doesn't ship it.
2025-05-13 17:38:36 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> I don't think RH prodsec has the spare cycles to do this for us.
2025-05-13 17:38:46 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I can't speak for them, but I suspect they will not want to do this. ;)
2025-05-13 17:38:50 <@salimma:fedora.im> (the suse security team is impressively active cross-distro, I can think of below and screen recently)
2025-05-13 17:39:16 <@salimma:fedora.im> we can bring this up with the ad-hoc security team in discourse and matrix I guess and discuss what we want to do
2025-05-13 17:39:38 <@salimma:fedora.im> but idk who there has much cycle for this, it's generally used for ad-hoc zero-day CVE patching coordination
2025-05-13 17:39:49 <@salimma:fedora.im> and telling people "don't package new SSL libraries"
2025-05-13 17:41:46 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Do we know how many users our Deeping packages get?
2025-05-13 17:41:53 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> *how much use
2025-05-13 17:42:07 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> (the "crypto-team" mailing list still doesn't show any the messages I've sent to it regarding that topic, LOL)
2025-05-13 17:42:16 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> zbyszek: I doubt it; the only metrics we have come from countme
2025-05-13 17:42:23 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> And there's no Deepin spin
2025-05-13 17:42:56 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Then the issue doesn't seem very urgent…
2025-05-13 17:43:36 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> I agree, this seems low-impact / unknown severity to me
2025-05-13 17:43:59 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> yep
2025-05-13 17:44:46 <@salimma:fedora.im> bring this up with the security people, and... meanwhile leave it open? or close
2025-05-13 17:44:59 <@salimma:fedora.im> or ask Adam to ask the security people
2025-05-13 17:45:32 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> I think we should make *some* evaluation. Maybe some interested person will dig into it.
2025-05-13 17:45:44 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> Proposal: Given that Fedora does not provide images with DDE pre-installed, we consider this request low-priority. Removal of the packages for DDE from the Fedora repositories can be discussed after the packages have been reviwed for the issues that were raised in OpenSUSE.
2025-05-13 17:46:13 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> sure, but then do we keep it open to track that? or close it?
2025-05-13 17:47:07 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> the question is ... *who* is going to do the checking?
2025-05-13 17:47:31 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> I'm pretty sure that I'm not qualified 😆
2025-05-13 17:47:58 <@salimma:fedora.im> nerdsnipe the SUSE people
2025-05-13 17:48:14 <@smooge:fedora.im> also what is going to be needed to be checked?
2025-05-13 17:48:19 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> We can also wait a bit for more response from Deepin upstream. The open suse blog note is still fairly fresh.
2025-05-13 17:48:37 <@salimma:fedora.im> yeah, suse normally contact upstream before posting publicly
2025-05-13 17:48:51 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> What their dbus and polkit rules do/are most importantly I guess
2025-05-13 17:48:55 <@salimma:fedora.im> let me check if there are any confidential discussion around this, if it's in linux-distros I can see it
2025-05-13 17:49:31 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> For the parts that we have packaged, for what the blog describes, are we vulnerable?
2025-05-13 17:49:59 <@smooge:fedora.im> understood, but I wanted to make sure that was noted versus 'we need to check'
2025-05-13 17:50:39 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> proposal: keep ticket open to track this, ask for help on discussion/devel to check our packages, revisit in a few weeks?
2025-05-13 17:50:50 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> I wonder if there are going to be CVEs filed for this, it would help us assess this ... 
2025-05-13 17:50:55 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> nirik: that sounds good to me
2025-05-13 17:50:57 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> nirik: +1
2025-05-13 17:50:58 <@smooge:fedora.im> in case the people volunteering to do this know where on the range of: "We have deepin packages" to "we are doing a level 0 analysis of all the source code and commits" needs to be
2025-05-13 17:51:54 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> I'd say somewhere in the middle ... the Polkit rules that allow users to do unsafe things seems most problematic 
2025-05-13 17:52:46 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Stephen J Smoogen: I think this is a very good question, but it's pretty hard to answer in advance. The suse post lists a bunch of specific issues and problems, so the first step would be to check if they are obviously reproducible in our packages. If yes, then deep analysis is probably not needed. But depending on that first round, some more checking could make sense.
2025-05-13 17:54:21 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Fabio Valentini: add action for somebody to send a mail to fedora-devel and move on?
2025-05-13 17:54:56 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> proposal to change whose FAS ID to "somebody"? 
2025-05-13 17:55:46 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> volunteers?
2025-05-13 17:56:12 <@salimma:fedora.im> I'll do it
2025-05-13 17:56:28 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> phew, the pressure
2025-05-13 17:56:30 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> 🙇
2025-05-13 17:56:56 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> !action salimma to post on the devel mailing list asking for help to determine impact in Fedora
2025-05-13 17:57:20 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> !topic Next Week's 🪑
2025-05-13 17:57:54 <@salimma:fedora.im> I'll have to sit this out, rh summit
2025-05-13 17:57:56 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> I haven't done it in a while. I suppose I'll take it.
2025-05-13 17:58:16 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Unless we will have a lot of people at Summit?
2025-05-13 17:59:01 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> We can always cancel if nobody shows up
2025-05-13 17:59:09 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> true enough
2025-05-13 17:59:20 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> !action sgallagh to chair next week's meeting (2025-05-20)
2025-05-13 17:59:28 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> !topic Open Floor
2025-05-13 18:00:05 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> I'm going to close shop in 2 minutes if there's nothing.
2025-05-13 18:00:41 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Fabio Valentini: thanks for chairing!
2025-05-13 18:01:15 <@zodbot:fedora.im> sgallagh gave a cookie to decathorpe. They now have 125 cookies, 4 of which were obtained in the Fedora 42 release cycle
2025-05-13 18:01:20 <@zodbot:fedora.im> salimma has already given cookies to decathorpe during the F42 timeframe
2025-05-13 18:01:44 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> I'll take the hint ;)
2025-05-13 18:01:50 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> go get some food
2025-05-13 18:01:51 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> !endmeeting