#meeting:fedoraproject.org log

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:01:38

!startmeeting FESCO (2025-05-20)

<@meetbot:fedora.im>

17:01:40

Meeting started at 2025-05-20 17:01:38 UTC

<@meetbot:fedora.im>

17:01:40

The Meeting name is 'FESCO (2025-05-20)'

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:01:42

!meetingname fesco

<@meetbot:fedora.im>

17:01:43

The Meeting Name is now fesco

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:01:46

!group members fesco

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

17:01:48

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

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:01:50

!topic Init Process

<@fale:fale.io>

17:01:52

!hi

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:01:52

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

17:01:53

Fabio Alessandro Locati (fale) - he / him / his

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

17:01:54

Stephen Gallagher (sgallagh) - he / him / his

<@dcantrell:fedora.im>

17:01:55

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

17:01:57

David Cantrell (dcantrell) - he / him / his

<@humaton:fedora.im>

17:02:00

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

17:02:01

Tomáš Hrčka (humaton) - he / him / his

<@decathorpe:fedora.im>

17:02:13

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

17:02:14

Fabio Valentini (decathorpe) - he / him / his

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

17:02:17

morning

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

17:02:20

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

17:02:21

Kevin Fenzi (kevin) - he / him / his

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:02:55

That's quorum. I'll give it another minute or two to see if anyone else turns up.

<@decathorpe:fedora.im>

17:02:59

it will never be jarring to see you say "morning" when I'm getting ready for dinner

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:03:00

Short agenda today, at least.

<@decathorpe:fedora.im>

17:03:08

it will never not be jarring to see you say "morning" when I'm getting ready for dinner

<@zbyszek:fedora.im>

17:03:42

I'm here.

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

17:03:44

( from: https://www.geekality.net/blog/universal-greeting-time-ugt ) :)

<@zbyszek:fedora.im>

17:03:44

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

17:03:46

Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek (zbyszek)

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:05:57

!topic #3385 Change: Java25 And No More System JDK

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:06:05

!fesco 3385

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

17:06:06

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

17:06:06

**fesco #3385** (https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3385):**Change: Java25 And No More System JDK**

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

17:06:06

● **Opened:** a month ago by amoloney

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

17:06:06

● **Last Updated:** 2 hours ago

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

17:06:06

● **Assignee:** jvanek

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:06:41

I'm not entirely sure where we are here. The Change Proposal is still hard to read (both from a dense technical standpoint and a language-barrier one)

<@decathorpe:fedora.im>

17:06:45

I'm beginning to think that we disagree on the meaning of the word "default"

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:07:01

I'm beginning to think there's some disagreement on the word "meaning".

<@decathorpe:fedora.im>

17:07:06

<@decathorpe:fedora.im>

17:07:22

as I understand it, for all intents and purposes, openjdk 25 will be "the default", whether we agree on that term or not

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:07:32

That's why I put up a straw-man version of how I'm reading the phrasing they used. Hopefully they'll correct me.

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:07:49

Fabio Valentini: I'm not sure that's true. Hence my continued queries.

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

17:08:09

my understanding is the same as the rephrase you posted to the ticket...

<@decathorpe:fedora.im>

17:08:20

(mine too, for that matter.)

<@fale:fale.io>

17:08:32

let's see what they reply to it :)

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

17:09:20

so... we want to punt _again_ ?

<@pboy:fedora.im>

17:09:22

Just from my knowledge as Java developer: sgallaghs refraising is correct. Technically the change is OK from my perspective.

<@zbyszek:fedora.im>

17:09:39

Same here.

<@pboy:fedora.im>

17:09:55

I worked with jvanek on a rephrasing.

<@decathorpe:fedora.im>

17:10:04

the problem I see with the current state is that we *have* to rely on third-party interpretations because the document itself is confusing

<@decathorpe:fedora.im>

17:10:23

but /shrug

<@pboy:fedora.im>

17:11:06

I worked with jvanek on a rephrasing. but I don't knwo his final version yet

<@zbyszek:fedora.im>

17:11:29

Yeah, and this is also a problem for users, because they'll read the page to figure out how/what changed, and they'll be confused.

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:11:37

Well, when you deal with contributors of many backgrounds, language-barrier issues will eventually crop up. I wouldn't necessarily want to block this on that.

<@decathorpe:fedora.im>

17:11:54

let's hope that the release notes will be clearer than the CP

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:11:56

We could conditionalize *completion* on having docs reviewed by native speakers for the announcement, though

<@pboy:fedora.im>

17:12:25

Regarding docs,

<@pboy:fedora.im>

17:12:52

Regarding docs, the most important thinks is to rework the users docs inQuck Co

<@zbyszek:fedora.im>

17:12:59

I think the RN would be written by somebody else. I wouldn't worry.

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:13:22

I think the reticence to use the term "default" comes from the Java folks not wanting to treat things as "bugs" if they don't work with Java 25, so long as they work with a shipped version of Java.

<@zbyszek:fedora.im>

17:13:24

"inQuck Co"?

<@pboy:fedora.im>

17:13:50

Stephen Gallagher: ++1

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

17:13:52

pboy gave a cookie to sgallagh. They now have 249 cookies, 1 of which were obtained in the Fedora 42 release cycle

<@pboy:fedora.im>

17:14:04

Quick Docs

<@decathorpe:fedora.im>

17:14:51

Stephen Gallagher: well, it will be a bug for *one JDK*, doesn't really matter for *which one*

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

17:15:09

Anyhow, I can be +1 (still) if we want to vote today.

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:15:09

Peter Boy: Can you confirm one remaining question for me? If I have two packages (let's say GUI apps) on my system, one that runs against Java 25 and one that runs against Java 21: Will I be able to run them both at the same time?

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:15:40

Fabio Valentini: I meant a "Fedora Packaging Bug".

<@zbyszek:fedora.im>

17:16:40

Stephen Gallagher: I would think "yes". Java runtimes are coinstallable. At least, you can always call /some/path/to/jdk-version/java.

<@pboy:fedora.im>

17:16:46

Stephen Gallagher: Yes you can start 2 instances which use differen Java JVM versions. That is a standard feature of Java JVM as realized in DFedora / Redhat.

<@fale:fale.io>

17:16:54

I think it would make sense to punt at least to wait the change owner confirmation of Stephen's interpretation

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:17:10

I know it should work with Java *in general*, I just want to make sure it would work with Java *as packaged*.

<@zbyszek:fedora.im>

17:17:24

But if a package is known to require specific version, then it can be arranged to use it via a wrapper script. (Which is needed anyway.)

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:17:27

Because those are subtle but important differences

<@pboy:fedora.im>

17:17:41

Stephen Gallagher: Yes, as packaged in Fedora and Redhat

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:18:09

OK, then with that understood, I'm +1 to this Change. I'll trust the technical details to the experts.

<@dcantrell:fedora.im>

17:20:03

I was and continue to be +1

<@fale:fale.io>

17:20:28

assuming Stephen's interpretation, I'm +1

<@decathorpe:fedora.im>

17:21:13

well, *assuming* it's reasonable, I'm +1 too of course 😆

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:21:15

I trust Peter to represent that accurately, so I think that puts us at (at least) +5.

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:21:29

OK, +6

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:22:37

!agreed FESCo approves the "Java25 And No More System JDK" Change for Fedora 43 (+6, 0, -0)

<@pboy:fedora.im>

17:22:52

OK, I'll start together with vjanek with the release notes and the Quick doc s update

<@zbyszek:fedora.im>

17:23:14

Peter Boy++

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:23:15

!topic #3408 Change: Wayland-only GNOME

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

17:23:16

zbyszek gave a cookie to pboy. They now have 35 cookies, 2 of which were obtained in the Fedora 42 release cycle

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

17:23:23

sgallagh gave a cookie to pboy. They now have 36 cookies, 3 of which were obtained in the Fedora 42 release cycle

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

17:23:27

fale gave a cookie to pboy. They now have 37 cookies, 4 of which were obtained in the Fedora 42 release cycle

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

17:23:32

humaton gave a cookie to pboy. They now have 38 cookies, 5 of which were obtained in the Fedora 42 release cycle

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:23:37

!fesco 3408

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

17:23:38

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

17:23:38

**fesco #3408** (https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3408):**Change: Wayland-only GNOME**

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

17:23:38

● **Opened:** 2 weeks ago by amoloney

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

17:23:38

● **Last Updated:** 7 hours ago

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

17:23:38

● **Assignee:** ngompa

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:24:03

We punted hoping for more feedback from upstream. Has anyone heard from them?

<@decathorpe:fedora.im>

17:24:52

hm, I don't think so

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:24:53

I'm pinging in #workstation:fedoraproject.org

<@fale:fale.io>

17:25:24

this week many people are traveling

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:25:35

Yeah, Summit kind of gets in the way.

<@decathorpe:fedora.im>

17:25:51

if it was discussed, it should have happened last tuesday after our meeting

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:25:52

err, I mean: "Check out the Red Hat Summit, it's great!"

<@decathorpe:fedora.im>

17:25:55

IIRC

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

17:25:59

I don't see anything new on the upstream MR

<@humaton:fedora.im>

17:26:48

https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-session/-/merge_requests/99#note_2427404

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

17:27:13

yes, that

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:27:20

FWIW, I agree with zbyszek in the ticket: I think it's premature for Fedora to *disallow* the X11 support if someone wants to try to maintain it. If upstream announces they're dropping it, that's a different story.

<@zbyszek:fedora.im>

17:28:25

> it would be very disruptive if GDM was unable to load Xorg sessions so I request that GNOME try to keep that working. My understanding is that GDM is the only login manager that currently works 100% with GNOME. It would be bad if we forced people who want to easily switch between desktops to use something like lightdm or sddm and then not have the Lock Screen working correctly in GNOME.

<@decathorpe:fedora.im>

17:28:25

FWIW I'm +1 either way, I don't think we should ship something that neither Fedora nor GNOME upstream supports 🤷

<@decathorpe:fedora.im>

17:29:25

making sure GDM keeps supporting launching X11 based sessions is kind of an independent issue though

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

17:29:26

Folks usng a gnome x11 session should... look for their plan asap... because one way or another it's not going to be around too long

<@fale:fale.io>

17:29:42

+1 on nirik's point

<@decathorpe:fedora.im>

17:30:19

<@decathorpe:fedora.im>

17:30:19

oh WAIT

<@decathorpe:fedora.im>

17:30:19

they should use a long-term supported distro like RHEL if they need stuff to be around for really long time

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:30:43

<@fale:fale.io>

17:30:58

my2cc: if Gnome is willing to support X11 one more release, we can postpone to F44. If gnome is not willing to support one more release, imho we shoul dnot do it either

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

17:31:41

I suppose I'd be ok with keeping it for 49 if gnome does, but... I wonder if we could put in a nag or something. I guess thats probibly too fancy/difficult.

<@zbyszek:fedora.im>

17:32:07

Fale: agreed, but then we are back to the question of what is upstream going to do.

<@fale:fale.io>

17:32:14

if there is an easy way of doing the nag, I'm +1 on it

<@decathorpe:fedora.im>

17:32:30

autostart shell script + zenity should be easy enough ...

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:32:44

I don't know about a "nag", but the firstboot/upgrade click-through should probably mention it

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:33:02

A full-on nag is only going to irritate people

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

17:33:22

anyhow, this is all bikeshedding... I guess we delay until we know more from upstream?

<@fale:fale.io>

17:33:56

zbyszek: true, though we still have time to make changelog decisions

<@fale:fale.io>

17:34:07

zbyszek: true, though we still have time to make change proposal decisions

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:34:28

Just heard back from mclasen: They're waiting for some feedback from Ubuntu folks about their plans

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:34:56

But they're moving ahead upstream with changing the build-time defaults to disable X11

<@decathorpe:fedora.im>

17:37:19

I am still Punt±0 CP+1

<@decathorpe:fedora.im>

17:37:26

but happy to be overruled

<@zbyszek:fedora.im>

17:38:02

I'm Punt+1 CP-1 for now. But happy to be overruled too.

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

17:39:04

Punt +1 CP +1

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:39:28

I don't think we can reach quorum, so I guess we punt again

<@dcantrell:fedora.im>

17:39:41

Punt±0 CP+1

<@fale:fale.io>

17:39:55

punt +0, CP+1

<@pboy:fedora.im>

17:41:42

Just my brief opinion on this: We are not doing ourselves any favors by prematurely banning X11. Our compatibility with many application programs would be jeopardized.

<@decathorpe:fedora.im>

17:41:58

it's not like xwayland is going away ...

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:42:03

Peter Boy: This does not disable XWayland

<@zbyszek:fedora.im>

17:42:07

FWIW, Neal was +1 in the ticket.

<@zbyszek:fedora.im>

17:42:14

(for the CP)

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:42:29

It does mean that plenty of things that took advantage of X11's lax security won't work thoguh

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:42:39

Like many screenshot/record apps

<@pboy:fedora.im>

17:42:57

Stephen Gallagher: I know, but xwayland doesn't work yet in various cases.

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:43:21

Peter Boy: At this point, most of the places it doesn't work are places where Wayland doesn't want to reintroduce bad practices. Not all, but most.

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

17:44:35

There's a number options: switch to another display manager and still login to gnome x11 (but lockscreen won't work probibly), switch to xfce or other X11 based desktop with lightdm/X11 based dm, adjust to using wayland and work on fixing any workflows that don't work there.

<@pboy:fedora.im>

17:45:14

Stephen Gallagher: yes, we should remove X11 in the long run. But not for F43. Projects are still working to migrate.

<@dcantrell:fedora.im>

17:45:18

yeah, I don't think this is all that bad. it's "if you want to use gnome, you're using it on wayland on fedora". if you want or need X11, there are many other environments

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:45:52

OK, I count +5, so I think this is approved. I'm going to log my vote as -1 officially. I think it's still a little early. I've been outvoted though.

<@decathorpe:fedora.im>

17:46:21

it's +5,0,-2 ?

<@decathorpe:fedora.im>

17:46:26

counting Neal as +1?

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:46:34

!agreed FESCo approves the "Wayland-only GNOME" Change for Fedora 43 (+5, 0, -2)

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:46:37

Yes

<@decathorpe:fedora.im>

17:46:59

🥳

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:47:30

!topic Next Week's Chair

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:47:33

Who wants it?

<@decathorpe:fedora.im>

17:48:16

hm ... when are the election results announced?

<@decathorpe:fedora.im>

17:48:23

maybe somebody who's not up for reelection

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:48:32

I don't think the voting has even started.

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:48:36

So definitely not before next meeting :)

<@fale:fale.io>

17:48:44

it should start today the voting

<@fale:fale.io>

17:49:52

if no one takes it, I can do it

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:50:16

"No elections currently open for voting" on https://elections.fedoraproject.org/

<@decathorpe:fedora.im>

17:50:27

see post by Aoife on the devel list

<@zbyszek:fedora.im>

17:51:09

> Voting period starts (@ 00:00:00 UTC) Tue 2025-05-20

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:51:20

https://fedorapeople.org/groups/schedule/f-42/f-42-elections-tasks.html says the voting period ends June 2

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:51:47

Announcement on June 3, so that would be the last meeting with this FESCo session

<@zbyszek:fedora.im>

17:51:48

https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/5S3MTHK5O4IKCSDPYBYJLCAVIRGB3GBE/

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:52:24

Though June 3rd may not reach quorum due to Flock travel

<@zbyszek:fedora.im>

17:53:04

Ah, yeah, at this time I'll be walking to the train station…

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:53:47

!action Fale to chair 2025-05-27 meeting

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

17:53:49

I think we should probibly cancel the 3rd.

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

17:53:55

sgallagh gave a cookie to fale. They now have 42 cookies, 3 of which were obtained in the Fedora 42 release cycle

<@dcantrell:fedora.im>

17:53:56

should we cancel the meeting the 3rd?

<@zbyszek:fedora.im>

17:54:03

<@decathorpe:fedora.im>

17:54:08

<@fale:fale.io>

17:54:14

<@decathorpe:fedora.im>

17:54:27

there'll be an in-the-flesh meeting at Flock, we can process tickets live :)

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:54:28

I'm not leaving until early on the 4th, but it sounds like I'd be here alone, so +1

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:55:20

!info There will be no FESCo meeting on June 3rd, 2025. Come to the Live FESCo Session at Flock if you can!

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

17:55:41

!topic Open Floor

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

17:56:51

decathorpe gave a cookie to sgallagh. They now have 250 cookies, 2 of which were obtained in the Fedora 42 release cycle

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

18:00:04

OK, I take it we have nothing further to discuss.

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

18:00:08

Thank you for coming, folks!

<@zbyszek:fedora.im>

18:00:18

Stephen Gallagher: thanks for chairing!

<@sgallagh:fedora.im>

18:00:20

!endmeeting